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
My mate Anna has a great archive of papers. Look her up some time!
are the papers from annas archive redundant with scihub, or are they from a different source?
Scihub is one of Annas sources iirc.
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.
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
I have seen that, but did not understand how to sign up.
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
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
I’m so glad we have the ability to hold back science through bureaucracy.
No one checks for that, and if they did, they’re the ones with the burden of proof
I’m not sure how anyone would ever know
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:
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
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)
I’ve cited enough off just expanded abstracts to say, how would they even know? It’s probably better than what I did, lol.
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.
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
> 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.
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.
You clearly are not :)
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