The Magic Café
Username:
Password:
[ Lost Password ]
  [ Forgot Username ]
The Magic Cafe Forum Index » » Not very magical, still... » » Researcher illegally shares millions of science papers free online to spread knowledge (12 Likes) Printer Friendly Version

 Go to page [Previous]  1~2~3~4~5~6~7~8 [Next]
JoeJoe
View Profile
Inner circle
Myrtle Beach
1910 Posts

Profile of JoeJoe
Quote:
"Freely" available. what does that mean?


Scihub is not "freely" available; the researchers being sued pay for it and not just with money but with their blood sweat and tears.

If the private sector can't do as good as a job as the free sector, perhaps they should step-up their game and stop telling others to tone down theirs. Because that is what they are complaining about.

This is not like Metallica suing fans because they are using Napster; this is Napster suing Metallica because they won't let them publish their content exclusively ...

... case-in-point: scientists are vowing to boycott this publishing company that ya'll is defending. They are the owners of the research - when the publishing company publishes their research, they are publishing it as a service for them - that is what they are paying them to do ... they do not get paid to impede publishing, duh:

http://thecostofknowledge.com/

-JoeJoe
Amazing JoeJoe on YouTube[url=https://www.youtube.com/user/AmazingJoeJoe]
Dannydoyle
View Profile
Eternal Order
20295 Posts

Profile of Dannydoyle
Quote:
On Feb 15, 2016, landmark wrote:
Not sure what you're getting at. Could you explain more?


All research is an investment. So who pays for that investment?
Danny Doyle
<BR>Semper Occultus
<BR>In a time of universal deceit, telling the truth is a revolutionary act....George Orwell
Magnus Eisengrim
View Profile
Inner circle
Sulla placed heads on
1064 Posts

Profile of Magnus Eisengrim
Quote:
On Feb 15, 2016, Dannydoyle wrote:
Quote:
On Feb 15, 2016, landmark wrote:
Not sure what you're getting at. Could you explain more?


All research is an investment. So who pays for that investment?


This is an important insight. If anyone has the power to (legally) weaken the publishing monopoly, it's the research funders. If funding were contingent on affordable distribution, the publishers would have to accommodate or die.

I suspect that it will eventually come to something like this.
The blood-dimmed tide is loosed, and everywhere
The ceremony of innocence is drowned;
The best lack all conviction, while the worst
Are full of passionate intensity.--Yeats
Dannydoyle
View Profile
Eternal Order
20295 Posts

Profile of Dannydoyle
Everyone seems to ignore the hard cost of research.

And beforemost someone says something stupid like free oranges think first.
Danny Doyle
<BR>Semper Occultus
<BR>In a time of universal deceit, telling the truth is a revolutionary act....George Orwell
Jonathan Townsend
View Profile
Eternal Order
Ossining, NY
27083 Posts

Profile of Jonathan Townsend
Does sciHub review submissions?

If not, then what is the,reliability if the data one finds there?
...to all the coins I've dropped here
landmark
View Profile
Inner circle
within a triangle
4864 Posts

Profile of landmark
Quote:
On Feb 15, 2016, Magnus Eisengrim wrote:
Quote:
On Feb 15, 2016, Dannydoyle wrote:
Quote:
On Feb 15, 2016, landmark wrote:
Not sure what you're getting at. Could you explain more?


All research is an investment. So who pays for that investment?


This is an important insight. If anyone has the power to (legally) weaken the publishing monopoly, it's the research funders. If funding were contingent on affordable distribution, the publishers would have to accommodate or die.

I suspect that it will eventually come to something like this.

In the case of non-governmental funders, there's no incentive for funders to demand that of publishers. What's the incentive for funders?

This is a societal problem that needs to be solved with societal norms: i.e. it is in the interest of a democratic society to support the free dissemination of academic knowledge. There are several approaches--the easiest is the filesharing approach; other possible approaches include govt subsidies for journals, or subsidies for those who would access them. I'm not sure yet which approach I favor.
landmark
View Profile
Inner circle
within a triangle
4864 Posts

Profile of landmark
Quote:
On Feb 15, 2016, Jonathan Townsend wrote:
Does sciHub review submissions?

If not, then what is the,reliability if the data one finds there?

My understanding is that Sci-hub is simply reprinting the journal articles, so the reliability is the same.

If your point is that the journals incur costs in the peer-review process, I think that's the one fair point so far. But those costs are minor compared to what they are charging; as far as I know, at least in my case, peer reviewers are not paid. So there are some costs for providing the container but it is vastly inflated. Either govt subsidy for real costs, to private publishers or an arm of the govt printing office could cover those costs.
S2000magician
View Profile
Inner circle
Yorba Linda, CA
3469 Posts

Profile of S2000magician
Quote:
On Feb 15, 2016, JoeJoe wrote:
Quote:
On Feb 14, 2016, Magnus Eisengrim wrote:
A publishing company can profit off of--wait for it--publishing! Owning the copyright to an article does not give patent rights, manufacturing privileges or anything like that. When publishers publish journals or books they have the legal right to sell them and they have legal protection of the reproduction of their products.

That is right - they own the paper they printed it on - period!! They do not own the research itself, therefore have no right to prevent anyone else from also publishing that research.

You clearly don't understand copyright.

The publisher doesn't own merely the paper. They own the right to publish the research. Nobody else has that right. If someone else publishes that research, they've violated the publisher's copyright.
Magnus Eisengrim
View Profile
Inner circle
Sulla placed heads on
1064 Posts

Profile of Magnus Eisengrim
Quote:
On Feb 15, 2016, Jonathan Townsend wrote:
Does sciHub review submissions?

If not, then what is the,reliability if the data one finds there?


This is one of the biggest issues with open access. Who will be the custodian, and can they be trusted? Open access without funded and transparent archival responsibilities opens to door to Ministry of Truth editing.
The blood-dimmed tide is loosed, and everywhere
The ceremony of innocence is drowned;
The best lack all conviction, while the worst
Are full of passionate intensity.--Yeats
Dannydoyle
View Profile
Eternal Order
20295 Posts

Profile of Dannydoyle
Quote:
On Feb 15, 2016, S2000magician wrote:
Quote:
On Feb 15, 2016, JoeJoe wrote:
Quote:
On Feb 14, 2016, Magnus Eisengrim wrote:
A publishing company can profit off of--wait for it--publishing! Owning the copyright to an article does not give patent rights, manufacturing privileges or anything like that. When publishers publish journals or books they have the legal right to sell them and they have legal protection of the reproduction of their products.

That is right - they own the paper they printed it on - period!! They do not own the research itself, therefore have no right to prevent anyone else from also publishing that research.

You clearly don't understand copyright.

The publisher doesn't own merely the paper. They own the right to publish the research. Nobody else has that right. If someone else publishes that research, they've violated the publisher's copyright.



Not in the land where oranges are currency of the realm and free.
Danny Doyle
<BR>Semper Occultus
<BR>In a time of universal deceit, telling the truth is a revolutionary act....George Orwell
landmark
View Profile
Inner circle
within a triangle
4864 Posts

Profile of landmark
Just a point of clarification of my position for those who are talking about the cost of research.

I am not talking about limiting someone from recouping on their research investment. Jonas Salk donated his polio vaccine in an incredible gesture of generosity, but I recognize that that is the exception. I am only arguing about the reproduction of the published academic work, not the rivalrous goods that may come out of it.

Suppose someone tomorrow finds an AIDS vaccine. I am *not* arguing that they should not be allowed to make money off it. But that is in the realm of patent law and possibly trade secrets. What I am arguing is that in that case, researchers should still have access to the published paper in order to vet the science and possibly advance it. If the researchers decide not to publish, then we are in a different world than that of academic research.

When a journal charges $750 for access to an article, the investors in the research see none of that money. That is strictly a publishing issue.
landmark
View Profile
Inner circle
within a triangle
4864 Posts

Profile of landmark
Quote:
On Feb 15, 2016, Magnus Eisengrim wrote:
Quote:
On Feb 15, 2016, Jonathan Townsend wrote:
Does sciHub review submissions?

If not, then what is the,reliability if the data one finds there?


This is one of the biggest issues with open access. Who will be the custodian, and can they be trusted? Open access without funded and transparent archival responsibilities opens to door to Ministry of Truth editing.


John, as a matter of clarification--in the scientific fields is it the norm that peer-reviewers get paid for their review work?
Dannydoyle
View Profile
Eternal Order
20295 Posts

Profile of Dannydoyle
Doesn't publishing cost money?
Danny Doyle
<BR>Semper Occultus
<BR>In a time of universal deceit, telling the truth is a revolutionary act....George Orwell
Magnus Eisengrim
View Profile
Inner circle
Sulla placed heads on
1064 Posts

Profile of Magnus Eisengrim
Quote:
On Feb 15, 2016, landmark wrote:


John, as a matter of clarification--in the scientific fields is it the norm that peer-reviewers get paid for their review work?


First, in my brief academic "career" I was a social scientist (education research) not a scientist, as we usually use the term. (I am not, and never have been tenured faculty at a university.)

Generally speaking, researching, journal publishing and peer-reviewing are not tasks for which scholars are paid. Authors of books get royalties; authors of journal articles and book chapters usually do not.

Peer-reviewing is seen as one of the duties of a paid scholar; it's contribution to the academic community.

In most colleges and universities (in North America, anyways), a professor's salary and increments are based on a formula that includes research, teaching and academic service such as peer-reviewing. There is a new trend toward adding public service (community outreach, support of public education, media, etc.) to the formula.
The blood-dimmed tide is loosed, and everywhere
The ceremony of innocence is drowned;
The best lack all conviction, while the worst
Are full of passionate intensity.--Yeats
landmark
View Profile
Inner circle
within a triangle
4864 Posts

Profile of landmark
Quote:
Generally speaking, researching, journal publishing and peer-reviewing are not tasks for which scholars are paid. Authors of books get royalties; authors of journal articles and book chapters usually do not.

Peer-reviewing is seen as one of the duties of a paid scholar; it's contribution to the academic community.

Yes, that was my experience in the humanities too. I'm assuming that's true in the hard sciences too, but I could be wrong.

@Danny: yes, there is a cost of publishing and that is a fair point. So it seems to me that there needs to be a solution that addresses those costs while keeping open access to scholars and researchers.
Jonathan Townsend
View Profile
Eternal Order
Ossining, NY
27083 Posts

Profile of Jonathan Townsend
What's the product?

Timely prestigiously announced findings?
Robust research data?

Different use cases.
...to all the coins I've dropped here
balducci
View Profile
Loyal user
Canada
230 Posts

Profile of balducci
Referees are very rarely paid cash money to referee journal papers. What I've observed in recent years is that you might be given complimentary short term access to some online resource maintained by the publisher. Like, say, access to the journal archives for a month. I think this is probably only a real benefit for people in developing or very poor nations. I mean, I doubt a researcher at, say, State College, Some State, USA, would not already have access.

Once in a blue moon you might get a cash honourarium for reviewing a book. I think I once scored $50 for doing this. Woo hoo.

Let me also mention that some for profit publishers, including Elsevier, support provide versions of open access for some or all of their publications. A random example:

https://www.elsevier.com/journals/applie......-options
Make America Great Again! - Trump in 2020 ... "We're a capitalistic society. I go into business, I don't make it, I go bankrupt. They're not going to bail me out. I've been on welfare and food stamps. Did anyone help me? No." - Craig T. Nelson, actor.
landmark
View Profile
Inner circle
within a triangle
4864 Posts

Profile of landmark
From balducci's link:

"To provide open access, this journal has a publication fee which needs to be met by the authors or their research funders for each article published open access.

The open access publication fee for this journal is USD 2500, excluding taxes."

We're starting to get into Martin Shkreli territory, though I'll probably be sorry I brought him up, as the cases have some important differences.
JoeJoe
View Profile
Inner circle
Myrtle Beach
1910 Posts

Profile of JoeJoe
Quote:
On Feb 15, 2016, S2000magician wrote:
You clearly don't understand copyright.

The publisher doesn't own merely the paper. They own the right to publish the research. Nobody else has that right. If someone else publishes that research, they've violated the publisher's copyright.


You are the one that clearly doesn't understand. The publisher's publication is a COPY of the researcher's research. The RESEARCHER owns the right to allow that to be copied .... NOT the publisher.



Quote:
On Feb 15, 2016, Dannydoyle wrote:
Everyone seems to ignore the hard cost of research.


The investor paying the cost of the research must also pay the publisher to have the research published. The publisher not allowing people to read the research is an example of someone not doing the job they are being paid to do. It is a violation of your system ... not mine.

Do the people reading the magazines at the doctor's office have to pay the publisher for the privilege of being able to read the magazines their doctor paid for?? Of course not - duh.

-JoeJoe
Amazing JoeJoe on YouTube[url=https://www.youtube.com/user/AmazingJoeJoe]
Magnus Eisengrim
View Profile
Inner circle
Sulla placed heads on
1064 Posts

Profile of Magnus Eisengrim
Quote:
What was needed was a piece of pure fantasy. Suddenly there sprang into his mind, ready made as it were, the image of a certain Comrade Ogilvy, who had recently died in battle, in heroic circumstances. There were occasions when Big Brother devoted his Order for the Day to commemorating some humble, rank-and-file Party member whose life and death he held up as an example worthy to be followed. Today he should commemorate Comrade Ogilvy. It was true that there was no such person as Comrade Ogilvy, but a few lines of print and a couple of faked photographs would soon bring him into existence.

Winston thought for a moment, then pulled the speakwrite towards him and began dictating in Big Brother’s familiar style: a style at once military and pedantic, and, because of a trick of asking questions and then promptly answering them (‘What lessons do we learn from this fact, comrades? The lesson -- which is also one of the fundamental principles of Ingsoc -- that,’ etc., etc.), easy to imitate.

At the age of three Comrade Ogilvy had refused all toys except a drum, a sub-machine gun, and a model helicopter. At six-- a year early, by a special relaxation of the rules-- he had joined the Spies, at nine he had been a troop leader. At eleven he had denounced his uncle to the Thought Police after overhearing a conversation which appeared to him to have criminal tendencies. At seventeen he had been a district organizer of the Junior Anti-Sex League. At nineteen he had designed a hand-grenade which had been adopted by the Ministry of Peace and which, at its first trial, had killed thirty-one Eurasian prisoners in one burst. At twenty-three he had perished in action. Pursued by enemy jet planes while flying over the Indian Ocean with important despatches, he had weighted his body with his machine gun and leapt out of the helicopter into deep water, despatches and all — an end, said Big Brother, which it was impossible to contemplate without feelings of envy. Big Brother added a few remarks on the purity and single-mindedness of Comrade Ogilvy’s life. He was a total abstainer and a nonsmoker, had no recreations except a daily hour in the gymnasium, and had taken a vow of celibacy, believing marriage and the care of a family to be incompatible with a twenty-four-hour-a-day devotion to duty. He had no subjects of conversation except the principles of Ingsoc, and no aim in life except the defeat of the Eurasian enemy and the hunting-down of spies, saboteurs, thought-criminals, and traitors generally.

Winston debated with himself whether to award Comrade Ogilvy the Order of Conspicuous Merit: in the end he decided against it because of the unnecessary cross-referencing that it would entail.

Once again he glanced at his rival in the opposite cubicle. Something seemed to tell him with certainty that Tillotson was busy on the same job as himself. There was no way of knowing whose job would finally be adopted, but he felt a profound conviction that it would be his own. Comrade Ogilvy, unimagined an hour ago, was now a fact. It struck him as curious that you could create dead men but not living ones. Comrade Ogilvy, who had never existed in the present, now existed in the past, and when once the act of forgery was forgotten, he would exist just as authentically, and upon the same evidence, as Charlemagne or Julius Caesar.


Orwell, 1984. Chapter 4
The blood-dimmed tide is loosed, and everywhere
The ceremony of innocence is drowned;
The best lack all conviction, while the worst
Are full of passionate intensity.--Yeats
The Magic Cafe Forum Index » » Not very magical, still... » » Researcher illegally shares millions of science papers free online to spread knowledge (12 Likes)
 Go to page [Previous]  1~2~3~4~5~6~7~8 [Next]
[ Top of Page ]
All content & postings Copyright © 2001-2020 Steve Brooks. All Rights Reserved.
This page was created in 0.25 seconds requiring 5 database queries.
The views and comments expressed on The Magic Café
are not necessarily those of The Magic Café, Steve Brooks, or Steve Brooks Magic.
> Privacy Statement <

ROTFL Billions and billions served! ROTFL