- for the lulz

- revenge for rejected paper

- badly written scraping script

- Elsevier is envious?

Could be a "proof" before selling a larger DDoS on the black market.

Gatekeepers who hate open access.

https://x.com/emilymbender/status/1696374958652522612

There is nothing in the tweet you are linking against open access.

The tweet says "arxiv is a cancer". It's obviously reasonable evidence that some people don't like arxiv. You are splitting hairs.

The author of that tweet clearly has an issue with the arxiv being an open repository where everyone can upload anything. There is nothing about open access in the tweet. And arxiv is not same as the concept or movement of open access. Most articles on Arxiv doesn't even have a proper license to fulfill the definition of Open Access in the BOAI declaration.

Further proof that the authors tweet is not about or against open access is that she publishes open access herself:

https://jlm.ipipan.waw.pl/index.php/JLM/article/view/292

https://nejlt.ep.liu.se/article/view/4017

https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.1145/3498366.3505816

Doesn't change the point. Also doesn't refute the point.

The original suggested "Gatekeepers who hate open access."

The example was actually a Gatekeeper who values peer review before publication.

Arxiv is open access prepublication, and doesn't remove the need for peer review to get into actual journals. If you apply for a grant and you say "I was published on Arxiv" you are not getting that grant.

Additionally, Arxiv won't kick you off their platform if you post a preprint there, and then you get published in Nature.

In other words, the reason it does not change the point is that Arxiv does not weaken the publication process for the actual journals the preprint will be submitted to. You still need peer review to get published and you are still incentivised to do just that.

You could argue 'preprints ARE publishing' but I'd need to be convinced of that point because I don't agree for the reasons stated above.

and the context really isn't "gatekeepers hate open access", is it.

The context is that the author of the tweet hates fast paced open research (which IMO is a net good for humanity) and makes up the strawman `"can't keep up" + "anything older than 6 months is irrelevant" in CS` quotes to justify that position.

There's timeless beauty in CS, but there's also a lot more fertile ground for research in CS, given how young the field is compared to the older sciences.

counterpoint: no she doesn't, that's weird nonsense.

and I've offered at least as much evidence as you have.

Awesome "error message" from x.com:

  y

That's it. Beautiful.

To reproduce

   curl https://x.com/username

   curl https://x.com

The second one gets a different "error message":

  x

That's it.

How to get a "z".

> Gatekeepers who hate open access.

For some reason I can not access this link.

Someone who has just plagiarized from it and wants to hide the source.

I ran an open service for more than a decade. The world is filled with people who do things that are bad and cannot be understood.

Some men just want to watch the world burn.

I’ve hosted a few free services over the past 2 years. They are just utilities, nothing controversial, yet there are DDOS attacks ever few weeks from some Chinese IP ranges (especially Alibaba). Ended up just blocking the ASN as the JA3 fingerprints were spoofed and they were sending legitimate looking data (thus difficult to identify and block)