Moose.Best
  • Communities
  • Create Post
  • Create Community
  • heart
    Support Lemmy
  • search
    Search
  • Login
  • Sign Up
misk@sopuli.xyz to Piracy: ꜱᴀɪʟ ᴛʜᴇ ʜɪɢʜ ꜱᴇᴀꜱ@lemmy.dbzer0.comEnglish · 4 months ago

Science paper piracy site Sci-Hub shares lots of retracted papers

arstechnica.com

external-link
message-square
12
link
fedilink
139
external-link

Science paper piracy site Sci-Hub shares lots of retracted papers

arstechnica.com

misk@sopuli.xyz to Piracy: ꜱᴀɪʟ ᴛʜᴇ ʜɪɢʜ ꜱᴇᴀꜱ@lemmy.dbzer0.comEnglish · 4 months ago
message-square
12
link
fedilink
85 percent of invalid papers continue to be shared after they’ve been retracted.
  • RobotToaster@mander.xyz
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    71
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    4 months ago

    And?

    It’s supposed to preserve them, retraction is sometimes used as a form of censorship. It’s a feature not a bug.

    • misk@sopuli.xyzOP
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      32
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      4 months ago

      Having access to retracted papers is nice but:

      Unfortunately, it appears that once Sci-Hub has a copy of a paper, it doesn’t necessarily have the ability to ensure it’s kept up to date. Based on a scan of its content done by researchers from India, about 85 percent of the invalid papers they checked had no indication that the paper had been retracted.

      • coherent_domain@infosec.pub
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        40
        ·
        edit-2
        4 months ago

        I think most people would use the publisher’s website first and then resort to scihub, because scihub requires a doi or publisher’s link to get the paper.

        I don’t think this causes much concern, even if so, I believe a good amount of blame should still fall on the publishers and academic systems that encourages gatekeeping knowledge. Especially when these knowledges are generated by public money, then the public should rightfully have access to them.

        • misk@sopuli.xyzOP
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          4
          arrow-down
          2
          ·
          4 months ago

          I’m assuming actual researchers know better but Scihub is accessible in plenty of ways. Retracted papers could be shared as a means of spreading misinformation or simply just stumbled upon by regular folks looking up something specific.

      • Uranium 🟩@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        18
        ·
        edit-2
        4 months ago

        I wonder how hard would it be to build a extension for a browser that checks the doi of the paper youre looking at on scihub against the live version, to see if there’s a retraction/update to the paper, and list the date of the changes. I assume that information wouldn’t be behind a paywall.

        The reason for it being via an extension is to reduce load on sci hub, and for the lookup requests to be decentralised and live for the relevant paper

        • trolske@feddit.org
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          9
          ·
          4 months ago

          Shouldn’t be impossible. There are addons for Zotero (reference manager) to check CrossRef for citation count and one of the post-publishing review platforms for comments on the paper.

    • ddash@lemmy.dbzer0.com
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      edit-2
      4 months ago

      Are there any public examples of that? The retraction process is so unbelievably convoluted and slow that I am surprised to hear it is used for censorship.

      • RobotToaster@mander.xyz
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        14
        ·
        edit-2
        4 months ago

        There’s a study on it here: https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC10691350/

        And here: https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S266651822100022X

        An article about a specific retraction of a study on mentorship: https://www.psychologytoday.com/gb/blog/checkpoints/202101/the-bad-retraction

        The lancet removed (although not formally retracted) an article on covid-19 in Gaza https://blogs.bmj.com/bmj/2021/06/02/political-censorship-in-academic-journals-sets-a-dangerous-new-precedent/

        China has allegedly forced at least one person to retract a study about public opinion on it https://retractionwatch.com/2024/07/10/author-blames-retraction-on-chinese-censorship/

        • ddash@lemmy.dbzer0.com
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          4 months ago

          Thanks!

Piracy: ꜱᴀɪʟ ᴛʜᴇ ʜɪɢʜ ꜱᴇᴀꜱ@lemmy.dbzer0.com

piracy@lemmy.dbzer0.com

Subscribe from Remote Instance

Create a post
You are not logged in. However you can subscribe from another Fediverse account, for example Lemmy or Mastodon. To do this, paste the following into the search field of your instance: !piracy@lemmy.dbzer0.com
⚓ Dedicated to the discussion of digital piracy, including ethical problems and legal advancements.

Rules • Full Version

1. Posts must be related to the discussion of digital piracy

2. Don’t request invites, trade, sell, or self-promote

3. Don’t request or link to specific pirated titles, including DMs

4. Don’t submit low-quality posts, be entitled, or harass others



Loot, Pillage, & Plunder

📜 c/Piracy Wiki (Community Edition):

  • 🪶 Megathread
  • 🪶 FAQ
  • 🪶 ISP Complaints
  • 🪶 Rules
  • 🪶 Glossary

🏴‍☠️ Other communities

FUCK ADOBE!

  • !GenP@lemmy.dbzer0.com

Torrenting/P2P:

  • !seedboxes@lemmy.dbzer0.com
  • !trackers@lemmy.dbzer0.com
  • !qbittorrent@lemmy.dbzer0.com
  • !libretorrent@lemmy.dbzer0.com
  • !soulseek@lemmy.dbzer0.com

Gaming:

  • !steamdeckpirates@lemmy.dbzer0.com
  • !newyuzupiracy@lemmy.dbzer0.com
  • !switchpirates@lemmy.dbzer0.com
  • !3dspiracy@lemmy.dbzer0.com
  • !retropirates@lemmy.dbzer0.com

💰 Please help cover server costs.

Ko-Fi Liberapay
Ko-fi Liberapay

Visibility: Public
globe

This community can be federated to other instances and be posted/commented in by their users.

  • 401 users / day
  • 1.46K users / week
  • 4.74K users / month
  • 11.3K users / 6 months
  • 1 local subscriber
  • 60.9K subscribers
  • 3K Posts
  • 55.8K Comments
  • Modlog
  • mods:
  • db0@lemmy.dbzer0.com
  • sunbrothersco@lemmy.dbzer0.com
  • Dataprolet@lemmy.dbzer0.com
  • Unruffled [they/them]@lemmy.dbzer0.com
  • RandomLegend [He/Him]@lemmy.dbzer0.com
  • Andromxda 🇺🇦🇵🇸🇹🇼@lemmy.dbzer0.com
  • CosmicTurtle0@lemmy.dbzer0.com
  • tenchiken@lemmy.dbzer0.com
  • BE: 0.19.11
  • Modlog
  • Instances
  • Docs
  • Code
  • join-lemmy.org