3 ms·
Is Sci-Hub still relevant? Haven’t they been frozen for like 5+ years at this point?
by misnome 10mo ago
Is Sci-Hub still relevant? Haven’t they been frozen for like 5+ years at this point?
- shaky-carrousel 10mo agoMore like: "is Google still relevant?" Specially for the kind of people that browses Sci-Hub. It's been months since I've done a search in ad-ridden Google.
- misnome 10mo agoI know lots of people who still use google. Sci-hub has ceased to be mentioned or considered when scientists/grads I know look for papers. Everything has gone back do “Does your institution have a subscription for X?”.
- catlikesshrimp 10mo agoI still use sci-hub because the newer the article, the less I trust it. I am not a student anymore, though.
- kelipso 10mo agoWell for a student or researcher, that’s completely impractical.
- hermanzegerman 10mo agoThere is a successor to SciHub which relies on IPFS
- Gander5739 10mo agoYou mean Nexus?
- hermanzegerman 10mo agoYes. Its not perfect, but it has a decent coverage
- mmooss 10mo agoWhat country are you in, if you don't mind saying?
- adrian_b 10mo agoThe research papers from 10, 20 or 50 years ago are at least as valuable and frequently more valuable than the papers from this year. A lot of "new" discoveries are rediscoveries of old things, which may have been not important at the time of their initial discovery, because in order to be useful they depended on advances in other domains, but when those advances happen, suddenly they become important and they can be the base of state-of-the-art techniques. Therefore Sci-Hub remains very relevant, as a repository containing a very large number of historically-important research papers, including many research papers from the 19th century or early 20th century, which should have been in the public domain, but which can still be found behind paywalls elsewhere.