4 ms·
So, pay for access, or go to your local library, or browse the internet, or get free access in a similar way that Aaron Swartz did? Knowledge often requires fun
by unpop 1mo ago
So, pay for access, or go to your local library, or browse the internet, or get free access in a similar way that Aaron Swartz did? Knowledge often requires funding to be created in the first place.
- DANmode 1mo agoWhy does every research team and lab use SciHub and/or Library Genesis?
- foldr 1mo agoI mean, they don’t, exclusively, or no-one would be giving money to JSTOR. And certainly, no-one would be scanning millions of old journal articles for free.
- DANmode 1mo agoComparatively few individuals are giving money to JSTOR these days. Mostly institutions that they’ve previously captured. And yes: not sure how you missed it, but for like a decade or more people have been scanning in millions of papers and books.
- foldr 1mo agoI don't know where people get the idea that JSTOR is one of the bad guys. It's a non-profit that scans old journal articles that would otherwise be a huge pain to access. It costs money to do that. What specifically have they done that you disapprove of?
- DANmode 1mo agoI don’t know where you got the idea I was talking about my opinion of JSTOR.
- foldr 1mo agoBeats me what you're talking about, then. The literal answer to your original question is that people use SciHub and Library Genesis because they're free. But they're free because they infringe copyright. Maybe Swartz was opposed to copyright per se or maybe he was trying to make a point about free availability of journal articles associated with publicly funded research. Either way, JSTOR is the wrong target. JSTOR doesn't hold the copyright on those articles. JSTOR does actual legit work to make scientific articles easier to access – which is exactly what Swartz seemed to be in favor of.
- DANmode 1mo agoIt’s free AND convenient. Shortening path and timelines to info, innovation, further research. That’s the end of the calculation. The rest is just money-clutching noise.
- DANmode 1mo ago> JSTOR does actual legit work to make scientific articles easier to access Just link (or specifically mention) a few things they’ve done that people really appreciate. No need to keep repeating the claim.
- foldr 1mo agoJSTOR provides digital access to print journal archives. That's useful to anyone who wants to read an old journal article without going to a physical library. I used to have to go to the library, dig out the relevant issue of Linguistic Inquiry, and photocopy it. Then in 2015, JSTOR started providing access to the entire scanned Linguistic Inquiry archive, so I could access all of those issues digitally. I don't understand what you mean by "money-clutching noise" in your other comment. I think enabling free universal public access to historical journal articles would be a great idea. However, some public money would then need to go towards the costs of that, and some reform of copyright law might also be needed.
- DANmode 1mo ago