this post was submitted on 08 Jan 2025
124 points (97.0% liked)

Piracy: ꜱᴀɪʟ ᴛʜᴇ ʜɪɢʜ ꜱᴇᴀꜱ

55283 readers
328 users here now

⚓ Dedicated to the discussion of digital piracy, including ethical problems and legal advancements.

Rules • Full Version

1. Posts must be related to the discussion of digital piracy

2. Don't request invites, trade, sell, or self-promote

3. Don't request or link to specific pirated titles, including DMs

4. Don't submit low-quality posts, be entitled, or harass others



Loot, Pillage, & Plunder

📜 c/Piracy Wiki (Community Edition):


💰 Please help cover server costs.

Ko-Fi Liberapay
Ko-fi Liberapay

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] coherent_domain@infosec.pub 32 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago) (1 children)

I think most people would use the publisher's website first and then resort to scihub, because scihub requires a doi or publisher's link to get the paper.

I don't think this causes much concern, even if so, I believe a good amount of blame should still fall on the publishers and academic systems that encourages gatekeeping knowledge. Especially when these knowledges are generated by public money, then the public should rightfully have access to them.

[–] misk@sopuli.xyz 2 points 21 hours ago

I’m assuming actual researchers know better but Scihub is accessible in plenty of ways. Retracted papers could be shared as a means of spreading misinformation or simply just stumbled upon by regular folks looking up something specific.