←back to thread

20 years of Google Scholar

(blog.google)
412 points thepuppet33r | 2 comments | 18 Nov 24 18:01 UTC | HN request time: 0s | source
Show context
teruakohatu ◴[18 Nov 24 20:59 UTC] No.42176959[source]▶
The best thing, by a long way, that Google Scholar has achieved is denying Elsevier & co a monopoly on academic search.

In most universities here in New Zealand, articles have to be published in a journal indexed by Elsevier's Scopus. Not in a Scopus-indexed journal, it does not count anymore than a reddit comment. This gives Elsevier tremendous power. But in CS/ML/AI most academics and students turn to Google Scholar first when doing searches.

replies(2): >>42177049 #>>42182014 #
freefaler ◴[18 Nov 24 21:07 UTC] No.42177049[source]▶
or turn to sci-hub and annas-arhive :)
replies(5): >>42177217 #>>42177399 #>>42177609 #>>42177877 #>>42179815 #
teruakohatu ◴[18 Nov 24 21:40 UTC] No.42177399[source]▶
Does sci-hub have up to date content these days?

Having pretty wide journal access through my institution means I don’t need to reach out to sci-hub.

replies(1): >>42177523 #
epcoa ◴[18 Nov 24 21:54 UTC] No.42177523[source]▶
sci-hub proper hasn't been updated since it's indefinite pause in december 2020. Alternatives are of variable success depending on field. It might be better for CS/Math, but medicine and life sciences it's pretty bad.
replies(1): >>42177628 #
whimsicalism ◴[18 Nov 24 22:05 UTC] No.42177628[source]▶
i believe they paused due to an indian court injunction and the case was heard this year, does anyone know any update?
replies(1): >>42180060 #
insane_dreamer ◴[19 Nov 24 04:15 UTC] No.42180060[source]▶
How would an Indian court case have any jurisdiction in Russia (not to mention mirrors)?
replies(1): >>42180610 #
1. cipheredStones ◴[19 Nov 24 06:40 UTC] No.42180610[source]▶
Sci-Hub complied with the order with the intent to actually argue their case (and possibly establish a legal justification for the site), rather than just defying the order and continuing to play cat-and-mouse with every authority.
replies(1): >>42183521 #
2. joshuaissac ◴[19 Nov 24 14:03 UTC] No.42183521[source]▶
And this is because they have a chance of winning. The same court has previously adopted a broad interpretation of what constitutes fair dealing.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/University_of_Oxford_v._Ramesh...