4 ms·
> I'm not sure this is what Aaron Swartz envisioned. Right, because Aaron Swartz is famous for negotiating deals to legally license and pay for PDFs. > They’r
by jjoonathan 6y ago
> I'm not sure this is what Aaron Swartz envisioned.
Right, because Aaron Swartz is famous for negotiating deals to legally license and pay for PDFs.
> They’re phishing, they’re spamming, they’re hacking, they’re password-cracking
I sure hope so. Relying on credential donations would be a great way to make Elsevier's anti-piracy efforts much easier while landing more academic activists in jail / suicide.
- sodality2 6y agoEh. I agree with the sentiment. But you do see how there is a difference between just downloading PDF's and what is referenced in the article? Not at all saying it is sci-hub's fault. And I myself have literally uploaded to sci-hub (ironically, in case my FBI agent is reading this). But it's not equivalent to crack accounts, scrape 45k pdfs as it is to simply upload something you've downloaded.
- jjoonathan 6y agoSo if Elsevier gets rid of network licenses like the one Aaron Swartz abused and the next generation of activists is forced to abuse other kinds of licenses, that means they should just roll over and give up? Really? Nuts! Look at it this way: would you rather A. lose the war and pay Elsevier forever and ever, B. donate your credentials to scihub and get slapped with a lifetime Elsevier ban and big Aaron Swartz suicide level lawsuit, or C. use a sketchy library computer one day and a few months later have to contact Elsevier support to get your account reset because the PDFs won't download? I don't know about you, but A and B seem really bad to me and C seems much less bad.
- sodality2 6y agoI prefer C.