Not exactly dead, but on a stale due to a legal dispute. However, they have started a new project that fits a legal grey-area called sci-net where people can ask for or help others get access to papers by getting them from their institutional login and sharing on the platform. Not as practical as sci-hub, but better than nothing and less prone to be taken down
Not really, you need to know (enough of) the content of what you're citing to make sure that the citation makes sense. The actual info you need to write down for the citation is easily available. How you accessed it is irrelevant.
Ooh, this is actually a more controversial take among academics than you can imagine!
Around week 3 of my course I ask the question "what percentage cut do academics get for published articles". They are always appalled to learn it is 0% (we get nothing, we are literally paid in exposure).
Below are some other issues with the journal industry as a whole:
For those who aren't scientists, no. You don't need legal access. You don't necessarily need any access at all (though imo it's negligent to cite without having read the paper)
Happens often to me. I know nobody in research who would care about it. Most people will likely congratulate you for not paying for access. Nobody likes the way journals do business.
I read the source of my citations, but nowhere am I required to cite the citations of my source. If you don't wanna "try" to access my resources... well, that sounds like a "you thing". Good luck, cause my paper remains
Have another one! Knowledge (and doing research) should be free and not only for people who can pay for it. Look up how ridiculously expensive and complicated it is to access those publications.
well fuck. there go those whitepapers i wrote about, i really don't remember, and cited articles i'd copied off the whatsit database years before before i'd lost access through the university
The fact that public funds go to research only for everything that those funds becoming privatized is a fucking crime.
No grant should be given to any research if the results aren't published on an open journal.
No grant should be given if any marketable discovery becomes privatized
I am still fucking pissed that most countries used public funds to develop a covid vaccine then gifted them to private for profit corporation. Same for basically every medical development.
Many countries' funding agencies require open access publications for work based on their funding. However, open access fees are insanely high in some journals (e.g. around $12k for the higher impact factor Nature journals)...
I like the general direction of that idea. But honestly, not sure if this should be national with all the political pressure and censorship that could come from that. With how international scientific research is, perhaps the UN or a newly formed international organisation could oversee such journals.
Going open access is great, and that's what I do, but it has to be said a lot of grants do NOT pay for open access publications, and diamond open access (free for authors and readers) is quite rare and you can wait eternity to get published.
So, it has to be paid straight out of personal finances.
If you mean Sci-hub, then yeah that's completely normal. I've used Sci-hub to access my own article once when I had lost access to the published version.
I'd rather use sci-hub than institutional access when the article is available. Fuck publishers.
Really hope someone comes up, recognizes how much public research money is wasted on this bullshit and sets up a public publisher directly funded by research funds which allows people to publish and read freely.
Yes, much better than the alternative system. Look, I found a cool article about a topic. Let's open it on the publisher website. Oh I need access for this, let's login. After login I still have no access and get redirected to institutional login. Get back to publisher, now I have institutional credentials, but need to login again. Finally done!
Your institution does not have access to this paper.
The dark web is a specific section of the *deep web that can be accessed only using specific software configurations or authorizations
The name make sense because it's in fact hidden, dark and makes quite a bit of sense, the problem is that dark things do make people quite a bit scared and that was then weaponized
And i say that because i don't want to go against whatever you said but to expand on the (in my opinion, too) simplistic view you shared
*the deep web is that huge chunk of the internet that is not indexed by any search engine
closed access publications are still the majority, but at least in my field there is practically always a preprint available and the tendency to migrate to open access journals is there. i hope it will stay
Bro but a lot of the big name guys made up a little citation here and a little citation there. Just publish on the lancet or nature. They won't know any better for decades. Maybe by the time people find out you've already pined for the fjords.
Best case scenario, in 1.5 billion years it won't matter anyway. Use AI and clone some images, little science bro. It's all just vibes.
70 Comments
HexesofVexes@lemmy.world · 117 pts · 52d
My mate Anna has a great archive of papers. Look her up some time!
morto@piefed.social · 16 pts · 52d
are the papers from annas archive redundant with scihub, or are they from a different source?
pmk@piefed.ca · 29 pts · 52d
Scihub is one of Annas sources iirc.
ranzispa@mander.xyz · 10 pts · 52d
Papers in Anna's archive are mostly from sci-hub. There's something not available on sci-hub, but not much.
Real problem is that sci-hub was the organization doing the archival on large scale and it is now dead.
morto@piefed.social · 6 pts · 51d
Not exactly dead, but on a stale due to a legal dispute. However, they have started a new project that fits a legal grey-area called sci-net where people can ask for or help others get access to papers by getting them from their institutional login and sharing on the platform. Not as practical as sci-hub, but better than nothing and less prone to be taken down
ranzispa@mander.xyz · 1 pts · 50d
I have seen that, but did not understand how to sign up.
morto@piefed.social · 1 pts · 49d
Looks like there's some cripto shit in there now to get an invite... It wasn't there last time I tried. now I'm not recommending it anymore
BremboTheFourth@piefed.ca · -41 pts · 52d
I'm no scientist but I imagine if you want to cite someone, you need to access their research legally
Holy fuck you people are insufferable. 20 down and flooding my inbox for that? What the fuck lmao
Gold_E_Lox@lemmy.dbzer0.com · 44 pts · 52d
I'm so glad we have the ability to hold back science through bureaucracy.
morto@piefed.social · 34 pts · 52d
No one checks for that, and if they did, they're the ones with the burden of proof
Zorcron@lemmy.zip · 27 pts · 52d
I’m not sure how anyone would ever know
testaccount372920@piefed.zip · 19 pts · 52d
Not really, you need to know (enough of) the content of what you're citing to make sure that the citation makes sense. The actual info you need to write down for the citation is easily available. How you accessed it is irrelevant.
HexesofVexes@lemmy.world · 17 pts · 52d
Ooh, this is actually a more controversial take among academics than you can imagine!
Around week 3 of my course I ask the question "what percentage cut do academics get for published articles". They are always appalled to learn it is 0% (we get nothing, we are literally paid in exposure).
Below are some other issues with the journal industry as a whole:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Serials_crisis?wprov=sfla1
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Academic_journal_publishing_reform?wprov=sfla1
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Elsevier#Criticism_and_controversies%3Fwprov=sfla1
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Cost_of_Knowledge?wprov=sfla1
Rugnjr@lemmy.blahaj.zone · 16 pts · 52d
For those who aren't scientists, no. You don't need legal access. You don't necessarily need any access at all (though imo it's negligent to cite without having read the paper)
taiyang@lemmy.world · 8 pts · 52d
I've cited enough off just expanded abstracts to say, how would they even know? It's probably better than what I did, lol.
ranzispa@mander.xyz · 6 pts · 52d
Happens often to me. I know nobody in research who would care about it. Most people will likely congratulate you for not paying for access. Nobody likes the way journals do business.
Fuck you Elsevier.
MrShankles@lemmy.world · 6 pts · 52d
I read the source of my citations, but nowhere am I required to cite the citations of my source. If you don't wanna "try" to access my resources... well, that sounds like a "you thing". Good luck, cause my paper remains
Paywalling knowledge is the same as bypassing it
Rai@lemmy.dbzer0.com · 5 pts · 51d
> says something really dumb and bad
> angry edit that people call out their smelly mouth filled with corn
It’s everyone’s fault but your own.
nlghtcrawIer@lemmy.world · 3 pts · 52d
You clearly are not :)
fatcat@discuss.tchncs.de · 3 pts · 51d
Have another one! Knowledge (and doing research) should be free and not only for people who can pay for it. Look up how ridiculously expensive and complicated it is to access those publications.
HeyThisIsntTheYMCA@lemmy.world · 2 pts · 52d
well fuck. there go those whitepapers i wrote about, i really don't remember, and cited articles i'd copied off the whatsit database years before before i'd lost access through the university
IAmNorRealTakeYourMeds@lemmy.world · 73 pts · 52d
The fact that public funds go to research only for everything that those funds becoming privatized is a fucking crime.
No grant should be given to any research if the results aren't published on an open journal.
No grant should be given if any marketable discovery becomes privatized
I am still fucking pissed that most countries used public funds to develop a covid vaccine then gifted them to private for profit corporation. Same for basically every medical development.
testaccount372920@piefed.zip · 21 pts · 52d
Many countries' funding agencies require open access publications for work based on their funding. However, open access fees are insanely high in some journals (e.g. around $12k for the higher impact factor Nature journals)...
IAmNorRealTakeYourMeds@lemmy.world · 26 pts · 52d
that's also bullshit, I reviewed papers for publication. it's free labour, hosting a pdf is nearly free.
there's no justification.
ranzispa@mander.xyz · 4 pts · 52d
I like to keep the submitted version after review but without editing on my public repositories. Even when I publish open access.
IAmNorRealTakeYourMeds@lemmy.world · 1 pts · 51d
Some of the papers I have reviewed was among the worse stuff I read.
I do not want to keep that
testaccount372920@piefed.zip · 4 pts · 52d
Oh yeah, those price tags are insane. They're making crazy profits of public money thanks to hiring schemes based on impact factors :/
captainlezbian@lemmy.world · 4 pts · 51d
We need nationally funded journals that are free for all people to read and mandate publication through them.
testaccount372920@piefed.zip · 4 pts · 51d
I like the general direction of that idea. But honestly, not sure if this should be national with all the political pressure and censorship that could come from that. With how international scientific research is, perhaps the UN or a newly formed international organisation could oversee such journals.
SCmSTR@lemmy.blahaj.zone · 39 pts · 52d
Aaron Swartz
fatcat@discuss.tchncs.de · 4 pts · 51d
Urgh…. My fucking god, that made me so angry.
Malyca@lemmy.zip · 4 pts · 51d
I still can't read it without tearing up
Maroon@lemmy.world · 4 pts · 51d
iocase@lemmy.zip · 2 pts · 51d
You can blame Ghislaine Maxwell's dad for creating the entire beast. He is literally to blame for all of it.
fullsquare@awful.systems · 34 pts · 52d
This is why i always place all important info in Supplementary Information which is almost always free of charge. except on sciencedirect. fuck them
wander1236@sh.itjust.works · 20 pts · 52d
Science not so direct
tdawg@lemmy.world · 12 pts · 52d
Directly into their vault
KingGordon@lemmy.world · 14 pts · 52d
Fuck elsevier.
wolframhydroxide@sh.itjust.works · 14 pts · 52d
Founded by Ghislaine Maxwell's father, yes, that Ghislaine Maxwell.
morto@piefed.social · 28 pts · 52d
Do your part and publish only on journals listed on doaj
tdawg@lemmy.world · 13 pts · 52d
Doaj?
morto@piefed.social · 16 pts · 52d
This one: https://doaj.org/
tdawg@lemmy.world · 2 pts · 51d
Oh sick!
Allero@lemmy.today · 5 pts · 52d
Going open access is great, and that's what I do, but it has to be said a lot of grants do NOT pay for open access publications, and diamond open access (free for authors and readers) is quite rare and you can wait eternity to get published.
So, it has to be paid straight out of personal finances.
morto@piefed.social · 1 pts · 51d
There are many journals without any cost for publication. Doaj lists them as diamond-tier open access
Allero@lemmy.today · 2 pts · 51d
I did mention them. Not always plenty in a particular subject area, often takes a lot of time to get published.
ranzispa@mander.xyz · 2 pts · 52d
I know people who get 12,000€ for a year long research project which includes employing other part time people. I doubt they can pay for open access.
However, the submitted version is yours to do whatever you want; please host it on your website or wherever it may be simple for you.
morto@piefed.social · 1 pts · 51d
There are many journals without any cost for publication. Doaj lists them as diamond-tier open access
sharktoes@lemmy.zip · 28 pts · 52d
I’ve heard of a lot of scientists using the dark web just to access research articles “illegally” lol
rustydrd@sh.itjust.works · 24 pts · 52d
If you mean Sci-hub, then yeah that's completely normal. I've used Sci-hub to access my own article once when I had lost access to the published version.
ranzispa@mander.xyz · 15 pts · 52d
I'd rather use sci-hub than institutional access when the article is available. Fuck publishers.
Really hope someone comes up, recognizes how much public research money is wasted on this bullshit and sets up a public publisher directly funded by research funds which allows people to publish and read freely.
mineralfellow@lemmy.world · 2 pts · 52d
It's also insanely efficient to post the link in the search and immediately have the paper.
ranzispa@mander.xyz · 7 pts · 52d
Yes, much better than the alternative system. Look, I found a cool article about a topic. Let's open it on the publisher website. Oh I need access for this, let's login. After login I still have no access and get redirected to institutional login. Get back to publisher, now I have institutional credentials, but need to login again. Finally done!
IAMgROOT@lemmy.wtf · 15 pts · 51d
"the dark web" is police fascist fearmongering for tech that lets people access the internet from censored countries
explodicle@sh.itjust.works · 9 pts · 51d
Counterpoint: it sounds super cool
Axolotl_cpp@feddit.it · 6 pts · 51d
The dark web is a specific section of the *deep web that can be accessed only using specific software configurations or authorizations
The name make sense because it's in fact hidden, dark and makes quite a bit of sense, the problem is that dark things do make people quite a bit scared and that was then weaponized
And i say that because i don't want to go against whatever you said but to expand on the (in my opinion, too) simplistic view you shared
*the deep web is that huge chunk of the internet that is not indexed by any search engine
sharktoes@lemmy.zip · 1 pts · 51d
Thanks for the correction! I meant deep web but got the both mixed up.
IAMgROOT@lemmy.wtf · 1 pts · 51d
there are onion search engines and directories, and "the dark web" refers to ANY onion site
Axolotl_cpp@feddit.it · 1 pts · 51d
I am sure i need to use the TOR network to use an onion search engine
Edit: apparently what i said is wrong
diaphragmwp@discuss.tchncs.de · 1 pts · 51d
I am sure I need the WWW network to use a search engine
Axolotl_cpp@feddit.it · 1 pts · 51d
prole@lemmy.blahaj.zone · 6 pts · 51d
I mean, it is definitely not just that
FundMECFS@piefed.zip · 21 pts · 51d
SkunkWorkz@lemmy.world · 20 pts · 52d
Then upload paper to SciHub and the Internet Archive
Malyca@lemmy.zip · 18 pts · 51d
I see capitalism is going as well for the scientific community as it is for the rest of us.
justme@lemmy.dbzer0.com · 4 pts · 50d
closed access publications are still the majority, but at least in my field there is practically always a preprint available and the tendency to migrate to open access journals is there. i hope it will stay
sepi@piefed.social · 0 pts · 52d
Bro but a lot of the big name guys made up a little citation here and a little citation there. Just publish on the lancet or nature. They won't know any better for decades. Maybe by the time people find out you've already pined for the fjords.
Best case scenario, in 1.5 billion years it won't matter anyway. Use AI and clone some images, little science bro. It's all just vibes.
W3dd1e@lemmy.zip · -1 pts · 52d
Use reader mode if your browser or app has that. It works in Voyager on iOS.
Reader mode strips JavaScript out so it works for most articles.
ranzispa@mander.xyz · 10 pts · 52d
This is talking about scientific papers. Stripping JavaScript does not work, you need authenticated and paid access to read those.
W3dd1e@lemmy.zip · 3 pts · 51d
Yeah, I realized that after I posted but I left it up in case it helped someone read other paywalls articles.
Sometimes I forget where I am when I’m browsing my home feed.
IAMgROOT@lemmy.wtf · -3 pts · 51d
ublock origin dropper click anything that bothers you
explodicle@sh.itjust.works · 10 pts · 51d
That doesn't just give you access to stuff