←back to thread

Sci-Hub has been blocked in India

(sci-hub.se)
260 points the-mitr | 9 comments | 28 Aug 25 04:47 UTC | HN request time: 1.16s | source | bottom
Show context
willgax ◴[28 Aug 25 06:11 UTC] No.45048979[source]▶
An individual scientist/researcher (most of them) is in pursuit of truth. Nothing matters, and nothing should matter other than that. For future discoveries, we should make knowledge as accessible as possible. But when an organization forms, it competes for power and superiority. This results in discriminatory actions that cause the overall regression of collective innovation. It is sad to see this happen.
replies(4): >>45049123 #>>45049758 #>>45050279 #>>45050283 #
1. oneshtein ◴[28 Aug 25 09:49 UTC] No.45050279[source]▶
Scientists can reproduce the findings and publish their own paper, instead of pirating someone else work.
replies(3): >>45050528 #>>45050926 #>>45051007 #
2. FabHK ◴[28 Aug 25 10:36 UTC] No.45050528[source]▶
How do you reproduce a paper without having read it?
replies(1): >>45050863 #
3. oneshtein ◴[28 Aug 25 11:28 UTC] No.45050863[source]▶
Obviously, someone must buy the paper, reproduce it, compare with original work, and then publish result for free. Same thing as for free software: someone must by a computer, write a software, then publish it on github.
replies(1): >>45051023 #
4. dns_snek ◴[28 Aug 25 11:37 UTC] No.45050926[source]▶
> pirating someone else work.

Are you aware that you're not paying the authors, but paying the journal, who usually don't pay the authors anything and even demand payment FROM the author to publish their article in the first place? This is not like buying a book, journals are leeches with morally indefensible business models.

replies(1): >>45051202 #
5. EbNar ◴[28 Aug 25 11:48 UTC] No.45051007[source]▶
I think you don't know what you're talking about.
6. ardfard ◴[28 Aug 25 11:51 UTC] No.45051023{3}[source]▶
Publishing it on GitHub is optional; you can publish it anywhere accessible. And unlike these journals, it doesn't cost you anything to access free software. In fact, paywalling it makes it unfree.
7. oneshtein ◴[28 Aug 25 12:11 UTC] No.45051202[source]▶
Authors decided to pay to these journals and play by their rules in return for something, that have value for them. I respect their choice. However, I also want to have better science with free access. I can reproduce few papers, and publish my work for free, if someone will peer review them for free.
replies(1): >>45051421 #
8. dns_snek ◴[28 Aug 25 12:38 UTC] No.45051421{3}[source]▶
> Authors decided to pay to these journals and play by their rules in return for something, that have value for them. I respect their choice.

Have you ever spoken to anyone who works in academia? Because almost everyone will tell you that they couldn't care less if people get their articles from SciHub. Academia is much uglier than you're romanticizing it to be.

replies(1): >>45051660 #
9. oneshtein ◴[28 Aug 25 13:01 UTC] No.45051660{4}[source]▶
Yep, I spoke. Yeo, they don't care, or have no clue. Nope, I respect their choice. IMHO, SciHub should be opt-in instead of opt-out to be legal.