News for hackers. Stuff that matters.

A comment on How The Chronicle is trying to malign Sci-Hub. Parent comment

Re:How The Chronicle is trying to malign Sci-Hub by rjmunro on Friday July 09, 2021 @06:57AM (#27782398)
I hear they generally are "freely" available, just email the authors and ask.
[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:How The Chronicle is trying to malign Sci-Hub by jasode on Friday July 09, 2021 @08:09AM (#27782842)
>I hear they generally are "freely" available, just email the authors and ask.

I didn't downvote you but the way contracts work, the researchers are not allowed to share the final published article that was professionally edited and typeset by the journal. What they can legally share are the preprints and manuscripts.[1]

Yes, some researchers may ignore the contract they signed (wink wink) and share the final published pdf. IME whenever I asked for a paper, I got the preprint -- which means the author honored their publishing contract. The preprint is fine in most cases because it will have the main idea of the research. However, it's often missing the pretty graphs and illustrations that the journal adds.

[1] https://www.elsevier.com/about/policies/sharing

[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:How The Chronicle is trying to malign Sci-Hub by subroutine on Friday July 09, 2021 @07:16AM (#27782503)
Having to wait for an author to email you a copy isn't a viable solution. Even getting authors to post a free copy, which is NIH mandate is often overlooked...

https://publicaccess.nih.gov/policy.htm

[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:How The Chronicle is trying to malign Sci-Hub by Someone on Friday July 09, 2021 @07:29AM (#27782578)
That’s not something you can blame the publishers for.
[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:How The Chronicle is trying to malign Sci-Hub by subroutine on Friday July 09, 2021 @08:00AM (#27782784)
Not saying it is.
[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:How The Chronicle is trying to malign Sci-Hub by BelenusMordred on Friday July 09, 2021 @07:16AM (#27782506)
You're not wrong but that system only works on a very small scale. Do you really think the authors would be amenable to answering 10000 emails with the exact same request?
[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:How The Chronicle is trying to malign Sci-Hub by ebiester on Friday July 09, 2021 @07:24AM (#27782552)
In general, an averagely successful paper in most disciplines will get 200-250 readers. It’s only when there is outsized media attention that there is any issue.

And luckily, for those cases today, sci-hub is available.

[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:How The Chronicle is trying to malign Sci-Hub by worik on Friday July 09, 2021 @07:33AM (#27782603)
A lot more readers than that, surely? In most disciplines there are a lot of, er, disciples. What is the definition of "moderately successful?"

Perhaps you mean citations?

[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:How The Chronicle is trying to malign Sci-Hub by pmyteh on Friday July 09, 2021 @08:44AM (#27783112)
The modal number of citations for an academic paper is ~0. 200 citations is a very successful paper in any discipline.
[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:How The Chronicle is trying to malign Sci-Hub by pmyteh on Friday July 09, 2021 @07:19AM (#27782526)
Fortunately(?) most of us will never be in a position where even 10 people ask to do that...
[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:How The Chronicle is trying to malign Sci-Hub by omega3 on Friday July 09, 2021 @07:43AM (#27782661)
Out of my small sample of three, one author sent me a journal, one ignored the request and another told me to pay him for it.
[ Parent | on HN ]