A_Duck
setgree
If there was every a ready-made use case for crypto, it's this. Alexandra Elbakyan is both a criminal in most places and a hero to many [0]. I want her to keep doing what she's doing, and that means someone probably has to pay her to do it. The whole point of Bitcoin is to make money permisionless, i.e. the right tool for this particular job.
[0] https://www.science.org/content/article/frustrated-science-s...
jsheard
Even if crypto is the only viable way to do this, doing it with their own memecoin instead of something that's already well established is a massive red flag. That means they can easily pre-mine vast amounts of their token for effectively nothing and then cash out by selling them all at once when the price peaks. Textbook shitcoin rug-pull.
troyvit
I hear what you're saying, but as a guy who knows this much |-----| about crypto, I would be worried about the same thing using anybody else's coin. Sci-net having full control over the value of the coin means they don't have to worry as much about uncontrollable fluctuations in coin price going with an established coin, especially now that governments are getting in on the action.[1]
The whole basis of this scheme comes down to trust on so many levels. Like:
> When creating a request, you can specify the amount of tokens uploader will receive for sharing the paper. However, the tokens will not be transferred after uploading the PDF right away, but only after you check the solution and click the 'Accept' button. The tokens subtracted from your account will be added to the uploader.
So a jerk can request a paper, receive the paper, then never pay for the paper if they feel like it.
I think this is just how the community is run.
[1] I guess people could still make a run on sci-hub coins outside of this market, but I bet the scale of the coin will never reach a level that makes that tempting.
Funes-
>doing it with their own memecoin instead of something that's already well established is a massive red flag.
It is. You want to reward people for their work in a private and reliable way? Monero's right there.
freeone3000
Isn’t that… also good? If you want to fund the project, isn’t that a very good way to send someone(the organizers of the shitcoin) money in an efficient and untracable way? The indirect market forces avoid the downfalls of Monero (not accepted) and direct BTC transmissions (traceable), and since it’s a pre-mine, it avoids the “splash damage” of a more common commodity. Doing a sci-hub pump-and-dump is almost ideal as a fundraising vehicle for sci-hub.
theptip
Exactly. Whatever your opinions on crypto, it should not be controversial that black market transactions are a perfect fit.
daveguy
Yup. It's literally the primary use for crypto.
beeflet
the traceability of bitcoin presents a problem in this situation. bitcoin isn't exactly fungible.
NoMoreNicksLeft
>The whole point of Bitcoin is to make money permisionless, i.e. the right tool for this particular job.
May have been true long ago, but when speculators are hoping to get rich-quick holding bitcoin for another n months, no one's going to spend it. Bitcoiners ruined bitcoin. It's not the right tool for anything, other than maybe paying traceless bribes to Congressmen.
troyvit
Yeah I would love to hear from people who know what _would_ be a better coin to use than a) Bitcoin and b) your own meme-coin.
bawolff
> It's not the right tool for anything, other than maybe paying traceless bribes to Congressmen.
If its useful for that, then presumably it would also be useful to giving traceless donations to criminals, since that is effectively the same thing.
Hence seems like the right tool for the job.
KingOfCoders
Send her money in an envelope if you want to pay her.
volemo
That would be actually illegal [1] while investing in her memecoin is only grey area.
[1]: Since, afaik, she lives in Russia and sending money in an envelope is made illegal by ФЗ № 176-ФЗ art. 22 p. "г".
PeterStuer
How would I know she could collect it?
tux3
It has already been tried without a reward, there are dedicated channels where you can go to request or fulfill requests (e.g. Nexus has these).
But it's a bit of an endless chore for a person to do, there are always more requests coming. It helps one person, but it doesn't really feel like efficient use of your time when it's a drop in the ocean.
I'm not thrilled with the crypto token thing, but it's good to see new things being tried. The worst that can happen is it doesn't work, there's not much to fear from this particular initiative. The worst they can do if it turns bad is... publish scientific articles.
A_Duck
Fair enough — didn't realise it had already been tried and it wasn't working without reward. That's not mentioned in the article but does make sense.
There's still a good argument for sci-hub to stay fully non-commercial. Let's see where it goes.
It's not clear if Sci-Hub themselves stand to make any money from this. If they do, the worst that can happen is that their incentives are distorted from being a highly-regarded community resource to maximising the number of manual uploads.
logifail
> if there are enough scientists who are keen to promote information sharing in their field without some minimal reward
I have two published papers from way back when, and thanks to the glorious broken incentives of academic publishing, I'm not even allowed to distribute my own work legally.
Most (even ex-)academics hate this crazy system with a passion, I know I do.
There's no need incentivise people to share academic papers, most people with access are only too ready to do so.
Medicineguy
Tbh, I like it!
Yes, crypto has a bad taste. But from my pov, the research paper situation is so broken, that anything that improves upon the status quo is highly welcomed.
But I'm with you with the penalties. Maybe they can add an option to forfeit the tokens to sci-net instead.
null
cge
>I also wonder if this will make the penalties for uploaders more severe since it becomes a commercial act
It's not clear whether this is even using a privacy-oriented cryptocurrency arrangement (assuming that would actually be private). What this appears to be presenting is a system where users will be pay, and be paid, to violate copyright, in a way that may well be easily traceable and linkable to real identities, and, for US users, likely even needs to be reported on tax returns even when just paying. The 'cup of coffee' statement entirely misses the point: the nature of the process changes when payments are involved.
Added to that are statements saying that they have systems to remove watermarks and protect the identity of users. If they're envisioning this being something researchers and students contribute to, that watermark removal system is likely to fail on many occasions, and people are potentially going to get themselves severely hurt.
I often feel like academic publishing and paper availability is somewhat of a cold war between researchers and publishers, where researchers practically need to violate copyright to research effectively, while publishers can't pursue those violations too severely, or they risk researchers ostracizing them, so we end up with unspoken understandings of acceptable violations. But a system like goes entirely outside of acceptable boundaries.
If a publisher came to a university and said, hey, this researcher put up the final copy of their own paper on their personal website in violation of copyright, the university might tell the researcher to replace the copy with a manuscript one. If a publisher comes to a university (or the police) and says they can show concrete evidence that one of their students is being paid through a foreign criminal organization to knowingly violate the terms of the university's subscriptions and likely criminally violate copyright, it seems like it could have a very different outcome.
StableAlkyne
> publishers can't pursue those violations too severely
A decade ago the publishing system harassed a researcher because he was downloading too many papers, going after him for millions in copyright "damages," only stopping proceedings after he ended his own life.
cge
Yes, and we still talk about him and that one case today, a decade later. It was also a case where circumstances around it (the 'breaking' into an unlocked cabinet, the 'hidden' laptop, the different university, the manifesto, and so on) all allowed the case to be presented as particularly bad by publishers and the government.
And that's the risk here, in part: this system allows the practice to be presented as a paid criminal enterprise, and allows individual users to be presented as criminal participants.
_bin_
I am a major hater of many (most?) crypto applications, which should tell you something since the idea of a decentralized currency outside state control is one that deeply appeals to my principles.
But this is one of the better applications I've seen. Running centralized infra for this specific case is extremely difficult and, generally speaking, it makes sense to give people the option to express to willingness to pay for what's essentially a priority request.
This isn't pay-for-access, it's "I'll offer some reward for you to get the paper now, after which it is still accessible to everyone."
My big quibble is with the implementation: there really doesn't need to be a sci-hub memecoin. Monero is purpose-built for this sort of thing. Use Monero (or zcash, I suppose.) Easy litmus test: if a DNM opened up that only supported transactions in its own "memecoin", how many people would take it seriously? Zero.
littlestymaar
> Is the incentive even necessary?
I don't know how “necessary” it is, but I strong doubt that it will be helpful at all, as the monetary incentive is a great way to attract malicious behavior (like spamming with AI-generated papers to farm rewards, or whatever works, really).
Mistletoe
Crypto is money in the future. You may as well have asked why must money infect everything that is good. Money is condensed time, the most valuable commodity in the universe.
eagleed
Money is either a hard-to-forge representation of the value of a variable in a distributed algorithm, or a claim on a share of the total output of the economy. It is a coordination tool, not "condensed time". It doesn't have any inherent value in isolation, and you can't eat it any more than you can eat political power.
What it can do is incentivize certain behavior by playing part in the distributed algorithm. But adding more tokens to the supply does not by itself make the economy produce more.
beeflet
A lot of bitcoiners like to fool themselves into thinking that bitcoin is some form of energy. That's not the case: you can turn energy into bitcoins, but not bitcoins into energy.
In the same manner you can turn time into money, but not money into time.
The most valuable thing in the world is actual time. Money is just a poor man's substitute.
aleph_minus_one
> you can turn energy into bitcoins, but not bitcoins into energy
Use bitcoin to pay your energy bill (e.g. gas, electricity, ...).
> In the same manner you can turn time into money, but not money into time.
Partially, you can:
- Hire a maid to do household chores instead of having to do them yourself
- Hire employees that do various aspects of your daily job
- Buy some expensive medical treatments that give you a few more years
- Buy healthy stuff, and have a healthy lifestyle; invest money in your wellness
- Less of a necessity to work lots of hours a day, i.e. have more free time
null
beeflet
This is gonna be a disaster. They would have been better off using an existing cryptocurrency instead of rolling their own. The problem with these "meme tokens" is that they are typically designed with terrible tokenomics that benefit the creator. And even worse, this has no anonymity, so the users are gonna get busted for using it.
> The only downside is that obtaining Sci-Hub tokens on the Solana network can be a non-trivial puzzle for a user who are new to crypto. But that only makes the process more interesting.
"Interesting"
Retr0id
> designed with terrible tokenomics that benefit the creator
Isn't benefiting the creator an explicit purpose/benefit of this system? (i.e. to fund the continued operation of sci-hub)
beeflet
Yes, but that should be done in a way more transparent way (donations, fees, etc.) than manipulating the tokenomics of the coin out from under you.
Retr0id
I thought the taxation vs inflation point you made in an earlier edit of this comment was a good one, did something make you change your mind to remove it?
eimrine
Benefiting the system is way more imporltant.
eimrine
At least rolling their own crypto might give the project their own hosting. But if their crypto is Solana, it does not count.
beeflet
The new trend of starting a "token" on top of some PoS cryptocurrency greatly saddens me.
Back in the old days, you would have to actually start your own cryptocurrency (like Dogecoin) every time you wanted to sell some worthless token. Not only did this result in more technical diversity of cryptocurrencies, but if you got enough people together you could do a 51% attack and take malicious projects off the network.
Nowadays, this would never work. Even if they couldn't hitch a ride on another cryptocurrency, they would just use PoS and with a premine it's basically classical consensus.
immibis
Special-purpose tokens are perfectly fine, and in fact, are what you should do whenever you want to represent something specific. You can make a token that represents an article request, or a bond, or a share of an investment fund, or anything else, and then someone can trade a certain number of them. Also, the market can figure out how much one of them is worth. It might even be more stable than the base token, as in the case of DAI (an decentralized stablecoin on the Ethereum chain).
mdrzn
"On Sci-Net, you're using tokens directly to reward uploaders. Payments go to fellow researchers, not to the platform."
I understood that payments go to fellow uploaders, which could be random university students that just do this to "earn" tokens. So the money is still not flowing to researchers. Have I misunderstood?
Medicineguy
I think you right. But researchers can upload their own papers. Seem to require a paying requester and the researcher has to notice the request.
volemo
While I agree this is phrased in somewhat misleading way, I think by "fellow researchers" they ment "researchers like you, user, who believe and participate in liberation of science", not "the researchers, who authored the paper you're trying to pirate".
kome
the point is not to pay researchers (lol), but to encourage uploaders with karma points, while paying for sci-hub infrastructure...
karaterobot
They make it very clear they aren't taking a cut. The quote in the linked page is "payments go to fellow researchers, not to the platform."
dns_snek
They don't need to take a cut of the transaction because they'll effectively own a significant part of the token supply. They make their "cut" whenever someone buys their tokens.
tokai
Why even use sci-hub anymore? With the lack of updates, instability over petty stuff like naming a wasp after the founder, etc. I don't see why anyone would use sci-hub over Anna's Archive.
krastanov
You should have started, not ended, your post with "Anna's Archive" ;D I did not know of it, which is why I used scihub.
yreg
In case Anna's archive goes down, plenty of people will be glad that SciHub exists. And vice versa, of course.
Maxion
Because I didn't know of anything better.
RankingMember
> The only downside is that obtaining Sci-Hub tokens on the Solana network can be a non-trivial puzzle for a user who are new to crypto. But that only makes the process more interesting.
Nah, that will ensure a huge swath of users can't/won't access, as they don't have the time/inclination to figure out the crypto aspect. Some will rebut this with "but they're getting it for free!", but a huge part of the value proposition of sci-hub.se is the ease of use- even people with legitimate access to an article used sci-hub because it's simply a smoother interface. This kills that.
troyvit
I think that also works in the favor of Sci-hub though.
> I regularly receive requests from Sci-Hub users to help them download some paper that cannot be opened through Sci-Hub. The number of such requests increased in the past two years, since Sci-Hub database updates were paused. The opposite also happens: users ask whether they can upload to Sci-Hub some paper that they have bought or downloaded via university subscription.
Now, instead of having to deal with all those requests, Sci-hub can point users to this market to get the paper instead of eating up its limited personal resources. Papers that they can automatically scrape will still be there as always, this is just to handle those special requests that need a human. If the user can't or won't set up a coin then they don't want the paper badly enough. I mean heck they can always go buy it from the journal.
aleph_minus_one
> Now, instead of having to deal with all those requests, Sci-hub can point users to this market to get the paper instead of eating up its limited personal resources.
The problem is not the limited resources of sci-hub, but that sci-hub actively decided to stop updating its database:
> https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/205911/why-did-...
This is actually the reason for the huge increase of the number of requests as the article explicitly admits:
> "The number of such requests increased in the past two years, since Sci-Hub database updates were paused."
kotaKat
This.
I went looking for a paper for the first time in forever and thought to go to Sci-Hub and was encumbered with whatever this crypto system is, confusingly.
This process isn’t “interesting”, it’s hot bullshit confusion.
Chinjut
Are these papers returned back into sci-hub? I don't quite follow why it seems like there's now two different repositories of papers.
bhy
It require token payment for invitation codes, however the current implementation is frustrating. It generate a QR code for mobile wallet, but there's no way to pay from a browser wallet, which I suppose is more commonly used in web3.
karaterobot
It seems like this coin mechanic is just for people who want to request specific articles that aren't already on Sci-hub, and those who upload requested papers. So, for everyone who doesn't want to engage with that system, there's no change, right?
I hope so, because it sounds dumb.
frainfreeze
It's nexus and telegram bots these days. Don't fall for sci net.
dns_snek
I've never been able to get anything provided by Nexus bots (or Lib STC which I believe is the same project?). I'm sure it works for some people but I probably tried on 5 or 10 different occasions at this point and it never worked :(
Anna's archive is my go-to these days.
spiderfarmer
Are there any successful crypto adjacent projects that do well outside the crypto-sphere? As soon as I notice the word crypto, I think the project will go the way of the dodo. But maybe I'm biased.
Luc
Numerai? Though I'm not so sure - their coin seems to have lost a lot of dollar value since I last checked.
antognini
Even so, the AUM of the underlying hedge fund has been going up. They've stopped publishing the fund's performance, though, so it's a little unclear if the increase is due to good performance or if they've just attracted more investors.
dns_snek
Saying that most crypto projects end up failing is about as interesting as saying that everyone who lives in the mountains ends up dying. The vast majority of projects fail in general.
acureau
Yet it's obvious why it's stupid to say that everyone who lives in the mountains ends up dying. The majority of projects fail, but we see successful projects all around us. I don't see any related to cryptocurrency. In fact, I've only ever seen them adopted as speculative investments.
null
mandmandam
I find Nano-gpt [0] extraordinarily useful, and a great use case for next-gen, non-scammy crypto.
jarbus
Why not just use Anna's archive at this point?
yreg
It's better to have redundancy with these things. I would rather see both Anna's archive and SciHub stay operational.
Probiotic6081
Almost unrelated, but this is one of the domains that just show up as "Server Not Found" by default to users in Germany. It's getting blocked by ISPs on the domain level after a "voluntary agreement" with copyright holders: https://torrentfreak.com/publisher-reinforces-paywall-with-s...
null
aleph_minus_one
Learn to setup your own DNS resolving infrastructure (or, if you need an ad-hoc solution immediately, learn how to use a different DNS resolver).
bibelo
same in France it seems
Why must crypto infect everything good?
Is the incentive even necessary? It would be worth testing if there are enough scientists who are keen to promote information sharing in their field without some minimal reward
I also wonder if this will make the penalties for uploaders more severe since it becomes a commercial act