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.
HexesofVexes@lemmy.world 2 days ago
My mate Anna has a great archive of papers. Look her up some time!
morto@piefed.social 2 days ago
are the papers from annas archive redundant with scihub, or are they from a different source?
pmk@piefed.ca 2 days ago
Scihub is one of Annas sources iirc.
ranzispa@mander.xyz 2 days ago
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.
BremboTheFourth@piefed.ca 2 days ago
I’m no scientist but I imagine if you want to cite someone, you need to access their research legally
Gold_E_Lox@lemmy.dbzer0.com 2 days ago
I’m so glad we have the ability to hold back science through bureaucracy.
morto@piefed.social 2 days ago
No one checks for that, and if they did, they’re the ones with the burden of proof
Zorcron@lemmy.zip 2 days ago
I’m not sure how anyone would ever know
testaccount372920@piefed.zip 2 days ago
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.
HexesofVexes@lemmy.world 2 days ago
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:
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Serials_crisis?wprov=sfla1
en.wikipedia.org/…/Academic_journal_publishing_re…
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Elsevier#Criticism_and_cont…
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Cost_of_Knowledge?wprov…
Rugnjr@lemmy.blahaj.zone 2 days ago
For those who aren’t scientists, no. You don’t need legal access. You don’t necessarily need access at all (though imo it’s negligent to cite without having read the paper)
taiyang@lemmy.world 2 days ago
I’ve cited enough off just expanded abstracts to say, how would they even know? It’s probably better than what I did, lol.
Rai@lemmy.dbzer0.com 2 days ago
> says something really dumb and bad
> angry edit that people call out their smelly mouth filled with corn
It’s everyone’s fault but your own.
ranzispa@mander.xyz 2 days ago
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.
MrShankles@lemmy.world 2 days ago
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
fatcat@discuss.tchncs.de 1 day ago
Have another one! Knowledge (and doing research) should be free and not only for people who can pay for it. Look up how ridiculously expensive and complicated it is to access those publications.
nlghtcrawIer@lemmy.world 2 days ago
You clearly are not :)
HeyThisIsntTheYMCA@lemmy.world 2 days ago
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