This is why i always place all important info in Supplementary Information which is almost always free of charge. except on sciencedirect. fuck them

Do your part and publish only on journals listed on doaj

Science not so direct

My mate Anna has a great archive of papers. Look her up some time!

Fuck elsevier.

Doaj?

Directly into their vault

I'm no scientist but I imagine if you want to cite someone, you need to access their research legally

Holy fuck you people are insufferable. 20 down and flooding my inbox for that? What the fuck lmao

I'm so glad we have the ability to hold back science through bureaucracy.

Bro but a lot of the big name guys made up a little citation here and a little citation there. Just publish on the lancet or nature. They won't know any better for decades. Maybe by the time people find out you've already pined for the fjords.

Best case scenario, in 1.5 billion years it won't matter anyway. Use AI and clone some images, little science bro. It's all just vibes.

This one: https://doaj.org/

well fuck. there go those whitepapers i wrote about, i really don't remember, and cited articles i'd copied off the whatsit database years before before i'd lost access through the university

I’m not sure how anyone would ever know

are the papers from annas archive redundant with scihub, or are they from a different source?

No one checks for that, and if they did, they're the ones with the burden of proof

The fact that public funds go to research only for everything that those funds becoming privatized is a fucking crime.

No grant should be given to any research if the results aren't published on an open journal.

No grant should be given if any marketable discovery becomes privatized

I am still fucking pissed that most countries used public funds to develop a covid vaccine then gifted them to private for profit corporation. Same for basically every medical development.

Founded by Ghislaine Maxwell's father, yes, that Ghislaine Maxwell.

You clearly are not :)

I've cited enough off just expanded abstracts to say, how would they even know? It's probably better than what I did, lol.

Use reader mode if your browser or app has that. It works in Voyager on iOS.

Reader mode strips JavaScript out so it works for most articles.

Scihub is one of Annas sources iirc.

For those who aren't scientists, no. You don't need legal access. You don't necessarily need any access at all (though imo it's negligent to cite without having read the paper)

I read the source of my citations, but nowhere am I required to cite the citations of my source. If you don't wanna "try" to access my resources... well, that sounds like a "you thing". Good luck, cause my paper remains

Paywalling knowledge is the same as bypassing it

I’ve heard of a lot of scientists using the dark web just to access research articles “illegally” lol

Not really, you need to know (enough of) the content of what you're citing to make sure that the citation makes sense. The actual info you need to write down for the citation is easily available. How you accessed it is irrelevant.

Many countries' funding agencies require open access publications for work based on their funding. However, open access fees are insanely high in some journals (e.g. around $12k for the higher impact factor Nature journals)...

that's also bullshit, I reviewed papers for publication. it's free labour, hosting a pdf is nearly free.

there's no justification.

Ooh, this is actually a more controversial take among academics than you can imagine!

Around week 3 of my course I ask the question "what percentage cut do academics get for published articles". They are always appalled to learn it is 0% (we get nothing, we are literally paid in exposure).

Below are some other issues with the journal industry as a whole:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Serials_crisis?wprov=sfla1

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Academic_journal_publishing_reform?wprov=sfla1

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Elsevier#Criticism_and_controversies%3Fwprov=sfla1

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Cost_of_Knowledge?wprov=sfla1

If you mean Sci-hub, then yeah that's completely normal. I've used Sci-hub to access my own article once when I had lost access to the published version.

Going open access is great, and that's what I do, but it has to be said a lot of grants do NOT pay for open access publications, and diamond open access (free for authors and readers) is quite rare and you can wait eternity to get published.

So, it has to be paid straight out of personal finances.

I'd rather use sci-hub than institutional access when the article is available. Fuck publishers.

Really hope someone comes up, recognizes how much public research money is wasted on this bullshit and sets up a public publisher directly funded by research funds which allows people to publish and read freely.

I like to keep the submitted version after review but without editing on my public repositories. Even when I publish open access.

Papers in Anna's archive are mostly from sci-hub. There's something not available on sci-hub, but not much.

Real problem is that sci-hub was the organization doing the archival on large scale and it is now dead.

Happens often to me. I know nobody in research who would care about it. Most people will likely congratulate you for not paying for access. Nobody likes the way journals do business.

Fuck you Elsevier.

I know people who get 12,000€ for a year long research project which includes employing other part time people. I doubt they can pay for open access.

However, the submitted version is yours to do whatever you want; please host it on your website or wherever it may be simple for you.

Then upload paper to SciHub and the Internet Archive

This is talking about scientific papers. Stripping JavaScript does not work, you need authenticated and paid access to read those.

Aaron Swartz

It's also insanely efficient to post the link in the search and immediately have the paper.

Oh yeah, those price tags are insane. They're making crazy profits of public money thanks to hiring schemes based on impact factors :/

Yes, much better than the alternative system. Look, I found a cool article about a topic. Let's open it on the publisher website. Oh I need access for this, let's login. After login I still have no access and get redirected to institutional login. Get back to publisher, now I have institutional credentials, but need to login again. Finally done!

Your institution does not have access to this paper.

"the dark web" is police fascist fearmongering for tech that lets people access the internet from censored countries

ublock origin
dropper
click anything that bothers you

I mean, it is definitely not just that

Yeah, I realized that after I posted but I left it up in case it helped someone read other paywalls articles.

Sometimes I forget where I am when I’m browsing my home feed.

Some of the papers I have reviewed was among the worse stuff I read.

I do not want to keep that

Oh sick!

That doesn't just give you access to stuff

Counterpoint: it sounds super cool

The dark web is a specific section of the *deep web that can be accessed only using specific software configurations or authorizations

The name make sense because it's in fact hidden, dark and makes quite a bit of sense, the problem is that dark things do make people quite a bit scared and that was then weaponized

And i say that because i don't want to go against whatever you said but to expand on the (in my opinion, too) simplistic view you shared

*the deep web is that huge chunk of the internet that is not indexed by any search engine