Elsevier Complaint Shuts Down Sci-Hub Domain Name

https://torrentfreak.com/elsevier-complaint-shuts-down-sci-hub-domain-name-160504/

by yunque • 10 years ago

450 227 10 years ago

lake992• 10 years ago

On the bright side, this will give some much-needed publicity to Tor Browser. Sci-hub is still available at http://scihub22266oqcxt.onion/

copperx• 10 years ago

Does using Tor puts you on some kind of list? It would be tragic if someone used Tor to read a scientific article but then got charged with aiding terrorism or looking for child pornography.

ldehaan• 10 years ago

nope. tor is anonymizing software used by many thousands of people. if you're really concerned use a VPN first, and download the tor browser using VPN. unnecessary IMO, but if you're concerned then this will give you an extra layer of protection.

Sir_Cmpwn• 10 years ago

Using Tor does put you on some kind of list, but you aren't going to get charged with aiding terrorism or looking for child pornography because of it. Unless you use it for those things, I guess, and get caught.

ocharles• 10 years ago

There's a good chance you'll end up on a list if you're an exit node, but if you're just using Tor I think you should be good.

wolfgke2• 10 years ago

Does using Tor puts you on some kind of list? It would be tragic if someone used Tor to read a scientific article but then got charged with aiding terrorism or looking for child pornography.

If it does, it becomes an ethical maxim to use Tor. If it doesn't, then you can simply use Tor. So by case analysis you should use Tor.

morgante5• 10 years ago

The fact that using Tor puts you on some kind of list makes it essential that you do in fact use it for innocuous purposes occasionally.

Seeking privacy should never be a crime.

return07• 10 years ago

We re all in lists. In fact, the more lists we're in, the less traceable we are.

middleclick• 10 years ago

The fact that you even have to think this suggests that you should use Tor so that they don't win in self-censoring the citizens.

bwoj• 10 years ago

Not sure why everyone is downvoting. You may not go on a list, but you could be targeted by the FBI if they can produce "probable cause"

http://www.thelastamericanvagabond.com/constitutional-rights...

nyolfen• 10 years ago

.cc still works for those who need it

mtgx• 10 years ago

It could probably use .se as well. TPB's .se domain still seems to be alive and kicking.

jfaucett• 10 years ago

"As a result of the legal battle the site (sci-hub.io) just lost one of its latest domain names. However, the site has no intentions of backing down, and will continue its fight to keep access to scientific knowledge free and open."

Does this not enrage people? Elsevier and closed-access journals like them, are doing all they can to impede human progress while leaching off of tax-payer dollars to do so. Something should be done to make what Elsevier and the like do illegal, are there any groups/political parties/etc going after them?

tmptmp5• 10 years ago

>Does this not enrage people? Elsevier and closed-access journals like them, are doing all they can to impede human progress while leaching off of tax-payer dollars to do so. Something should be done to make what Elsevier and the like do illegal, are there any groups/political parties/etc going after them?

This does enrage many people, but one feels somewhat helpless here. But we can surely raise a hue and cry over the internet/emails/whatsapp/social media etc. Let more and more of the scientific community know about the existence of sci-hub and let these scum publishers bleed to death. Political parties may not want to disturb their money-givers though.

return07• 10 years ago

The onus is on the scientists. Elsevier does its job. If you were given a golden ring as a gift every day, I bet you would end up opening a jewelry shop as well. Even if scientists want to use alternative open access publishers, it's a game of who blinks first. They won't do it because their colleagues don't.

devishard2• 10 years ago

The onus is on the scientists. Elsevier does its job. If you were given a golden ring as a gift every day, I bet you would end up opening a jewelry shop as well.

The idea that Elsevier is somehow not responsible for their actions because they're just doing their job is abhorrent, and I entirely reject it. If what you do is actively harmful to society, the onus is on you to fix it. Yes, the onus is also on scientists, too, to not enable Elsevier's bad behavior, but they're not the ones choosing Elsevier's access policies; they only have indirect control.

wrsh07• 10 years ago

This is a case of badly screwed-up incentives. No individual has incentives to fix the system, so they keep optimizing for how they're actually rewarded [academics --> tenure / prestige, journals --> make money, govt --> get lobbied].

chrismonsanto5• 10 years ago

You are missing a case for academics. Even after tenure, we have to continue publishing in these venues or our students wont be able to find work.

fudged712• 10 years ago

So basically the Bystander Effect. Who should be singled out?

Lawtonfogle4• 10 years ago

It is my opinion that any research behind a paywall does not exist. If I told you that I have research that showed some effect X, but there was no way for me to make that accessible to the public, no one would put any weight at all behind it (well except for those who really want X to be true). Does it matter if it is a pay wall or if I promise it exists and my girlfriend up in Canada, the one who only visits when you aren't here, has it? No, not really.

rdiddly• 10 years ago

"Does this not enrage people?"

I think I have rage-fatigue, with all the swindles, con-jobs and injustices I've seen. But I do recognize this as utter bullshit. Though unfortunately every other effort to take from the commons, charge money for it, and build a private fortune, throughout history, has also been bullshit; hence the rage-fatigue.

This and things like it, do enrage people, and that's why in the US they gravitate toward Sanders, Trump, nihilism, and crime.

enraged_camel• 10 years ago

Rage-fatigue is a fantastic way to describe it. People have so many things to worry about already. Their jobs, their families, their college loans, their retirement... Frankly, some publisher charging for access to scientific papers paid for by taxpayers is going to be pretty low on their list of priorities.

atemerev• 10 years ago

While I support open science and Sci-Hub is great, I also can see publisher's side.

Imagine the same site with pirated high quality scientific books. (There are some, but in darker corners of the Internet). Would open access to these books be advantageous for humanity? Most definitely. Will publishers get mad about it? Even more definitely. Should publisher's work be free? I think not.

However, you can't get both sides of the coin at once. Either authors are paying publishers to get their papers peer reviewed and published (they do now), or publishers may collect payments from readers and libraries. Not both ways.

rainforest• 10 years ago

Should publisher's work be free? I think not.

What value does the publisher's work add to the work the author generated?

mkohlmyr• 10 years ago

Presumably the value in a journal publisher is: a) it's name, being accepted to certain journals is an indicator of quality b) to readers who are guaranteed published works have been peer reviewed

That being said I'm not a massive fan and I believe there is probably a model whereby you can get these value-adds without the closed down subscription system. Publicly funded research should be publicly available.

raphman3• 10 years ago

What value does the publisher's work add to the work the author generated?

- organizing peer review - spell-checking and fixing layout problems - making sure that the paper stays available for a long time - handling complaints and retracting fraudulent papers - providing a single point of contact for people who would like to reuse published material (e.g., using illustrations in a textbook).

Sure, many publishers don't do a very good job for the money they are taking. Sure, there might be better approaches for disseminating knowledge than the current one. However, in the world as it is now, publishers can and do provide some value.

jessriedel• 10 years ago

Imagine the same site with pirated high quality scientific books. (There are some, but in darker corners of the Internet).

Library genesis isn't that dark of a corner these days.

http://gen.lib.rus.ec/

http://golibgen.io/

tmptmp5• 10 years ago

>Should publisher's work be free? I think not.

What exact work these publishers are doing? How much are they demanding for that? Who is funding the research? Who is doing the work?

These publishers are just mean middlemen who are trying to extract as much money as they can/want from both the authors and the readers. Now is the time to get rid of them.

refurb6• 10 years ago

What exact work these publishers are doing?

Typesetting, third party review, offering visibility in a high quality journal?

The point is nothing is stopping scientists from publishing in other, open source journals. But they don't. That means these journals offer something of value to them.

saganus• 10 years ago

Some of the arguments I've read against publishers are along the lines that they take papers that were funded with public money, and thus in theory are in the public domain, yet they charge an arm and a leg for that information while at the same time preventing anyone else from distributing the free versions.

So how is it that they are entitled to be payed for something they didn't create or even own for that matter? Maybe if they did actually offered an added value service, then the freebie version would be inferior and would be no need to block them from being distributed, since people would just pick their own enhanced (curated?) versions.

As far as I understand it, Elsevier should only have a say on content they actually own the copyright for, which could be a lot of papers, but if I understand correctly SciHub was publishing papers that were funded with public money, is it not? or are they also hosting papers for which the copyright is actually owned by someone else?

vibrio• 10 years ago

With the advent of the internet, the marginal cost of producing and distributing such content has dropped by orders of magnitude since the 1990's. One would expect in a competitive, healthy economic system, some of this productivity gain would fall to customers in lower prices. This has not happened. While piracy is not the ultimate answer, it may be necessary to force the hand of the businesses and government to restructure. I don't know how/how much publishers should be compensated, but they will not give up their current rent-seeking status unless it is ripped from their cold dead hands. Information production/distribution has become a commodity, and should be priced only to support the value add of peer-review, etc. Meanwhile should authors be compensated? Yes, As an observation from the corner of science that i inhabit: authorship of 'high quality scientific books' is a 'secondary profession' with most authors having primary commitments to academic positions--which are very much enriched by authorship. I believe authors will continue to be compensated both directly and indirectly, as they are providing most of the value in the product.

morgante5• 10 years ago

The book example is not very helpful for a few reasons.

Firstly, the authors of books do get paid—writing books is not a pure tax imposed by academia.

Secondly, books are not typically at the frontier of scientific knowledge (these days). They're interesting and helpful, but accessing them is not a necessity for keeping up to date. Put simply, books do not have a monopoly on knowledge.

Finally, and most importantly, books are not funded by the public. Research is. If the public is paying for something, they should have access to it.

freddref• 10 years ago

Should publisher's work be free?

Publishers work is not needed, it can be distributed among authors who can do it at a negligible cost.

Luc• 10 years ago

Billions, man. They're making billions per year in profit. 'Should publisher's work be free?' is not the right question. Their service is so far from free it's indecent.

JadeNB4• 10 years ago

They're making billions per year in profit. 'Should publisher's work be free?' is not the right question.

I don't understand the logic. We shouldn't ask if the work of people making billions should be free? That seems like exactly the sort of people of whom we should be asking it.

Lawtonfogle4• 10 years ago

Imagine the same site with pirated high quality scientific books.

Imagine if publishers went and banned libraries, because only those who can afford books should be allowed to read them.

krapp3• 10 years ago

Libraries pay for their books, which is why they have the legal right to lend them.

zo12• 10 years ago

Is there a donate location of sorts that we can pay into to support the efforts that the sci-hub person/team/organization is doing?

This is a another good cause that I would find worthy to donate to.

Edit. Ok, found it:

http://www.sci-hub.cc/donate

Apparently, only bitcoin donations are possible at the moment. BitCoint Wallet for donations: 1K4t2vSBSS2xFjZ6PofYnbgZewjeqbG1TM

finnn3• 10 years ago

I see a different Bitcoin address. I recommend people visit the site and not use the address random commenters on the internet post. Not saying the parent comment is up to something, sci-hub may have rotated the address for whatever reason. The one I see starts with 14ghuGKD

EDIT: Ah, interestingly, the 1K4t2v address appears on the scihub.cc homepage, but not the donate page that was linked

Fuxy2• 10 years ago

Accessing the ip posted in the article it shows the bitcoin address posted by the OP.

I even switch over to https to make sure the request is not modified.

zo12• 10 years ago

I thought about not posting it as well. When I did, I double-checked myself twice to make sure I didn't post the wrong one.

amelius2• 10 years ago

Is it legal to donate?

al_chemist• 10 years ago

I think that asking a question like this says a lot about your country.

thesimon• 10 years ago

Why exactly was a New York court able to issue an injunction for a ".io" domain?

It is a British Territory extension being managed by "Internet Computer Bureau Ltd" based in the United Kingdom.

chinathrow• 10 years ago

I would love to learn more why Elsevier _only_ reports a profit of 37%?

I've read here on HN and elsewhere multiple times, that most of the work done is outsourced to third party labor, which is done essentially for free:

- writing papers

- organising reviews

- reviewing papers

teh• 10 years ago

I worked as a contractor for MacMillan (they publish nature) and it's hard to believe how much money they spend for no results. The project I was on had been running for a year when I joined. I noped out after three months and I heard it was shut down a few months after I left with nothing to show.

That was 4-6 people full time and my entire floor of 80 people was full of projects like that - projects you never heard of.

The weird thing is that everyone I worked with directly was very smart, and went on to do cool stuff.

Summary: If I had to guess the remaining profit is wasted on silly projects and high manager salaries.

leni536• 10 years ago

(Thanks for daveguy: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=11593881)

https://31.184.194.81/ (sci-hub.io cert)

https://sci-hub.cc (same ip as above, sci-hub.io cert)

https://sci-hub.ac (same ip as above, sci-hub.io cert)

https://sci-hub.bz (uses a separate certificate and ip address -- 104.28.20.155)

And a tor site: scihub22266oqcxt.onion

Fuxy2• 10 years ago

Anybody know a linux script/software that would 'lock' a domain down to am IP regardless what the registrar does.

Maybe have even a out of band way of updating it without the registrars involvement.

I guess what I'm looking for would be P2P DNS server although making sure the data is not fake would be difficult without some kind of signing.

Wonder if it could use the bitcoin ledger as a kind of key server?

Edit: I know /etc/hosts does the job it's just lacking if the server changes IP

return07• 10 years ago

/etc/hosts ?

hartator• 10 years ago

echo "google.com 127.0.0.1" >> /etc/hosts

toomuchtodo4• 10 years ago

Sibling posts are accurate about hard coding /etc/hosts, although Sci Hub needs to move to IPFS [1].

[1] https://ipfs.io/

dethos• 10 years ago

For the locking feature I'm not sure, but there are alternative DNS networks such as https://www.opennicproject.org

daveguy• 10 years ago

You're welcome! Thanks for reposting to keep the info active. One thing to add to that:

https://www.facebook.com/sci.hub.org

Their original domain was sci-hub.org, which got shut down a while back. Occasionally they post updated information to the facebook page.

Also, @fuxy. You can change your /etc/hosts file on a linux or BSD box to include the line:

31.184.194.81 sci-hub.io

That will override the DNS and go straight to the site.

Windows has a similar file located here (at least for win7):

C:\Windows\System32\drivers\etc\hosts

A perfectly reasonable location for a hosts file.

oneloop4• 10 years ago

Guys, I have a question. If it's this simple to put a server into the onion, why are people not doing this with torrent trackers? I'm thinking specifically about thepiratebay.org which is still banned in the UK (at the ISP level, I believe). Then mirrors appear and then the mirrors get banned?

Why not just put it into the onion? Put it there once, problem solved.

chejazi• 10 years ago

Perhaps the primary reason is accessibility. Onion addresses are not easily memorized. See https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Zooko%27s_triangle

I believe this inconvenience is minor, however.

Tiksi• 10 years ago

They do: http://uj3wazyk5u4hnvtk.onion/

But most people don't run tor often or at all.

bra-ket• 10 years ago

twitter: https://twitter.com/sci_hub

vkontakte: http://vk.com/sci_hub

return07• 10 years ago

trivial but handy bookmarklet link for scihub:

  javascript:window.location='http://sci-hub.bz/'+window.location

x5n1• 10 years ago

Long live Aaron Swartz

chias3• 10 years ago

I feel a little tingle of excitement seeing my own papers on Sci-Hub. I mean I get that they're trying to index all publications so it's not a "stamp or approval" or anything... but it does mean that people can actually access the knowledge I tried to throw into the world, which was kind of the whole point in doing it.

I'd update my academic website to link my papers to their sci-hub URLs if I didn't think I'd catch a world of flak for it.

dougmccune5• 10 years ago

I'm genuinely curious who you think would give you flak. Publishers? Your department faculty? The librarian at your university? Your peers?

(reason I'm interested: I'm on the board of Sage and have a board meeting tomorrow where I hope we'll be discussing sci-hub)

chias3• 10 years ago

I'm mostly concerned about what my department would do under pressure from publishers and/or the government. Being part of a state university, publicly endorsing illegal actions is unwise on my part. Especially if they undermine the establishment that the school serves.

nxzero2• 10 years ago

SAGE Publications' busts of the peer review and citation ring back in 2014 was great work.

Might it be possible for you to expand on SAGE's position of Sci-Hub?

AndrewOMartin• 10 years ago

I felt that tingle too! I saw a book I co-edited on SciHub on the same day the publishers sent me a royalty statement reminding me that absolutely zero people want to pay 120GBP to read what I (my co-editors and contributors) put together through a whole lot of unpaid effort.

robryan• 10 years ago

Why wouldn't they price at a rate that would generate some sales? Given that nearly all of the costs associated with the book would have already been paid?

finfet12• 10 years ago

IEEE and IEEE Explore have been actively going after professors and forcing them to take down links to their own papers. In the past, many professors hosted pdf's on their websites for their papers -- this has only stopped because IEEE has been forcing them off. Just wanted to add this for those who think professors have 'suddenly become stingy' -- no, they aren't - they were forced to.

therobot24• 10 years ago

i haven't heard this, this is interesting any links with more info?

JadeNB4• 10 years ago

Interestingly, it's gone the other way in mathematics. It used to be that lots of journals required authors to sign some sort of statement saying that they wouldn't post PDFs on their web pages. (I remember one professor who had a page essentially saying "Here's the PDFs. Sue me, Elsevier!" Unfortunately, I don't remember who it was) Eventually, I think in response to the massive, overwhelming popularity of the arXiv, which I think most mathematicians would choose over journals if forced to choose, the big publishers decided, slowly, piecemeal, and behind the times as always [0], to go with the times and stop fighting something that was going to happen anyway.

[0] With an exception for the AMS, which has always (as long as I have cared, and checked, anyway) had publication policies that are as author- and reader-friendly as one can probably expect in the real world.

phw• 10 years ago

Citation needed. I have been hosting various IEEE papers on my websites for years and have never heard from IEEE.

My understanding is that CS publishers tolerate researchers hosting their own papers, but I'm very interested in evidence suggesting otherwise.

cs2818• 10 years ago

Really? I haven't seen this happening yet. I still self-host copies of my publications. I'm not sure how I (or others in the same position) would respond to a request to remove them from IEEE.

hyperion2010• 10 years ago

These days you can just post the dois and mention scihub somewhere innocuous. The readers will figure it out and I'd love to see the publishers win when there is no direct link to the papers.

omegaham• 10 years ago

This reminds me of that old Steve Martin movie, The Jerk, where the protagonist finds out that he's in the phone book.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-7aIf1YnbbU

fosco• 10 years ago

Quote" I'm in the phone book! Things are going to start happening for me now!"

agumonkey4• 10 years ago

Felt similar seeing my name on https://haveibeenpwned.com/

Alex3917• 10 years ago

it does mean that people can actually access the knowledge I tried to throw into the world, which was kind of the whole point in doing it.

I mean obviously it wasn't the whole point if you didn't publish them freely in the first place.

taneq• 10 years ago

I know what you mean, it's great to feel like you've contributed to the sum total of humanity's knowledge like that.

And now my ego demands that I go check to see whether the one paper I've published is up on there! :D

wyager• 10 years ago

Domain names should not, in principle, be subject to the arbitrary edicts of governments. I hope that, in the future, we switch to a decentralised and cryptographically incorruptible system a la Namecoin.

DarkLinkXXXX7• 10 years ago

Being free would also be nice. But of course, we also need a way to disincentive squatting.

thaw13579• 10 years ago

Maybe this is an opportune time to bring up a related concern. It's crucial that any system for disseminating scientific work be reliable and persist indefinitely. I don't like the current system, but I wonder how this will be achieved otherwise.

DarkLinkXXXX7• 10 years ago

I agree. I don't want papers to dissapear indefinitely due to an IT mistake, and I'm sure there are many researchers that don't save previous papers locally. That, and being able to access cited works is also important.

blue_dinner• 10 years ago

Just like with music and file sharing, this will not hurt the large corporations. It will only hurt the researchers that depend on these papers for funding and make it more difficult for them to make a living in the future.

It will also push companies to keep research more private and proprietary. Why would I spend millions of dollars on research, only to have it freely distributed to everyone, including my potential competitors?

I've never witnesses a time where more people fight to give up more and more of their own power and hand it over to governments and large corporations on a silver platter...and then complain when it's all gone.

gradschool2• 10 years ago

Are you aware that unlike musicians, academic researchers don't get paid royalties on their publications? A list of prestigious publications on one's cv leads to funding and job opportunities regardless of whether anyone pays to read them.

maxerickson• 10 years ago

Lots of academics are collecting royalties on books.

Typically not large royalties, but they are collecting them.

chris_wot5• 10 years ago

I wonder if there is a way of distributing a signed file that contains the IP address of sci-hub over a distributed medium?

Someone else would just need to write a small script that copied it into the system's host file - but make it generic enough that it works for anything. That would help non-technical users.

This would stop courts from going after centralised name servers.

There really needs to be a way of decentralising name servers.

DarkLinkXXXX7• 10 years ago

It's possible in principle. Just use public-key cryptography (perhaps the SSL cert of the website), grep and ed. You could have it update once a day from the sites listed, or perhaps create some type of dht backend.

P.S. This dht-based P2P dns project might interest you. https://github.com/mwarning/KadNode

chris_wot5• 10 years ago

What about distributing it? Is there a way of decentralizing that?

I notice there is Tahoe lafs...

https://www.tahoe-lafs.org/trac/tahoe-lafs

duaneb• 10 years ago

Namecoin fits the bill.

grownseed2• 10 years ago

Recently shared this here: http://www.thebookseller.com/news/elsevier-defends-its-value... (https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=11614926) which I'm guessing is the precursor to this debacle.

Reading what Elsevier have to say, you'd think they're either completely delusional (I doubt so), or know full well that they're rapidly becoming irrelevant/abhorred and are adopting a bully position, all the while pretending to be innocent and blameless victims of this situation.

Don't count on me to shed a tear when Elsevier go under.

grownseed2• 10 years ago

Just saw Elsevier retweeted this:

"Science is better and more accurate when it's inclusive." (https://twitter.com/ElsevierConnect/status/72821552586887578...)

I realize this is about gender, but I can't help but feel a bit of irony in there...

nickpsecurity5• 10 years ago

Great observation. They're calling their own BS indirectly. Whoever is involved in SciHub with strong presence on social media should immediately start using that quote to push SciHub. :)

chrismonsanto5• 10 years ago

Meanwhile, academic pirates continue to flood to Sci-Hub, domain seizure or not.

I realize readers of torrentfreak.com have a different relationship with the word "pirate" but--

This is not piracy. You are entitled to read work from Sci-Hub, as your taxes funded the researchers who created the work. We academics want you to read our work, we do not benefit in any way from publisher paywalls. We continue to publish in these venues because it is necessary for career advancement (whether for us, or for our students).

Please continue to "pirate" our work, and please spread the word about this problem.

fudged712• 10 years ago

Is this argument valid internationally?

My canadian taxes didn't pay for american research, should I still be able to access those papers?

squidfood• 10 years ago

I'm in the U.S. and enjoy a few Canada-based journals that detail work funded by Canada. Fair trade, eh?

uxp• 10 years ago

Sure. Same way that if you were to drive down for a weekend and not pay taxes on the roads you specifically used across the border.

Until thousands of Canadians come down every weekend just so they can use American roads and then go back home to fill up on gas, we won't worry about it.

chrismonsanto5• 10 years ago

Researchers regularly make use of work from other countries, the scientific community is international. Even if one could make an argument for not allowing Canadians to access US research without payment, it doesn't follow that Elsevier and friends are the ones who should be paid.

Research done by government employees is legally required to be public domain. I see no reason we shouldn't extend that to researchers who take government funding.

return07• 10 years ago

Although i agree, that's an extremely odd statement. Also, does it make sense for scientists to ask the public to fix the situation for them? Literally save them from themselves?

tzs• 10 years ago

You are entitled to read work from Sci-Hub, as your taxes funded the researchers who created the work.

Am I entitled to a joy ride in an F-15, as my taxes funded its purchase?

foepys• 10 years ago

Yes, you are. You only have to fulfill the requirements to make sure you don't destroy it within a few seconds and aren't a danger to others. It may take a few years but you can get a fully tax-funded education on flying an F-15.

cessor• 10 years ago

"We wish to set back society, because we want to make more money".

I use Sci-Hub all the time. I can access all papers via my library subscriptions so I actually DO have paid access to everything, but searching with and authenticating against my university library's services is slow and tedious and not feasible if I want to download many papers quickly.

return07• 10 years ago

Plus multiple times sciencedirect was down for me.

gherkin0• 10 years ago

How big is the sci-hub database?

Are there full/partial mirrors published anywhere?

DarkLinkXXXX7• 10 years ago

We can see here, over 50mil papers. http://libgen.io/scimag/repository_torrent_notforall/

As you can see here, they have three mirrors. One Moscow, one Ocean(ia?), and one Cyber(ia?). Libgen also has a mirror.

As for BookSC, they seem to be quite a bit out of date, or something.

joelthelion• 10 years ago

Are people working on a better system to replace DNS? This little game is quickly becoming tiring.

dest• 10 years ago

namecoin, Tor adresses...

ashitlerferad2• 10 years ago

GNUnet has the GNU name system:

https://www.gnunet.org/gns

nickpsecurity5• 10 years ago

Tks for tip. Never heard of it.

mnl• 10 years ago

Yet again, please don't mention other sites here or in reddit etc. Being in the spotlight is not good for them. What they are doing is morally fine in my book, but infringes the law and you are contributing to their demise. Keep it low profile, the more you blab about them the sooner they are gone. And until the next platform makes it -if it does, you can't guarantee it will- it is going to cause a lot of damage to many careers out there, because there are many people that have no choice but this one. If this is a war, it is a war of attrition, it can't be won by pointing out the targets.

michakirschbaum• 10 years ago

Looking forward to watching the Streisand Effect play out.

plg• 10 years ago

why not set it up as a tor hidden service?

cloudjacker• 10 years ago

yeah but where's the torrent?

jheriko• 10 years ago

As much as I completely support freedom of information there is a problem with not respecting the law that seems to be growing...

I might disagree with the law. I might break it intentionally, but I do my due diligence and do it knowingly.

When i get caught I hold up my hands and face the consequences because I entered into that knowingly. I have actually done this irl. This is why I have no respect for this, or for Uber, Aaron Schwartz or this entire ridiculous movement of subversion instead of facing up to the challenge and taking it extremely seriously and tackling it up front and openly with some pride and courage.

I'm glad people are fighting to keep this alive anyway. That imo is part of the right approach, to defeat the law by showing its futility in the face of reality when it is very far into the wrong. But ffs, don't hide from what you have done like some kind of child. Face up to your responsiblity and take it on the chin... and let people be angry about that, because that is an actual, serious wrong.

"Words are wind."

alwaysdownvoted2• 10 years ago

  echo "93.174.95.27  elsevier.com" >> /etc/hosts

http://elsevier.com/scimag

Elsevier Complaint Shuts Down Sci-Hub Domain Name

Related Stories