Pirates are Popular
from fossilesque@mander.xyz to science_memes@mander.xyz on 03 Jul 00:37
https://mander.xyz/post/33277684

#science_memes

threaded - newest

sunoc@sh.itjust.works on 03 Jul 01:54 next collapse

🏴‍☠️🏴‍☠️🏴‍☠️

Lemminary@lemmy.world on 03 Jul 06:11 collapse

And my 🦜!

Geodad@lemmy.world on 03 Jul 01:55 next collapse

If scientists didn’t have to pay obscene prices to view articles, those articles are cited more often. Who would have thought?

Mavvik@lemmy.ca on 03 Jul 02:42 next collapse

I personally like scihub because it’s easier to get papers off of rather than going through my library’s portal for a lot of journals.

fossilesque@mander.xyz on 03 Jul 03:09 collapse

One of us.

serenissi@lemmy.world on 03 Jul 16:15 collapse

yes

idiomaddict@lemmy.world on 03 Jul 05:28 next collapse

I don’t know if it’s just my field or if I’m searching wrong, but I get almost nothing when I look for papers about German grammar and language instruction. Is this mostly for more mainstream/hard science papers?

Droggelbecher@lemmy.world on 03 Jul 07:57 next collapse

Idk if itll help but have you tried annas archive? It mirrors multiple science piracy sites.

Edit:do you mean pedagogical materials or research? Cause I don’t think you’ll be lucky if it’s the former.

idiomaddict@lemmy.world on 03 Jul 16:05 collapse

I have tried it, but also not had any luck. I am looking for research, but it’s still a really narrow field, tbh. Even in Germany, I think there are only a handful of DaF/aZ postgrad programs.

Droggelbecher@lemmy.world on 03 Jul 20:39 collapse

So yeah it’s probably your field! Sorry about that. Fwiw I don’t think the problem is that it isn’t ‘hard science’, I find it easy to find philosophical works (German, English and French language ones). It’s probably just too niche.

illusionist@lemmy.zip on 03 Jul 11:41 next collapse

I can’t speak for your field or language but someone has to upload it. Content in German and about grammar sounds very specific. Maybe there’s a lack of interest on scihub. Ask around in your circle where they share/get their articles

pdqcp@lemmy.dbzer0.com on 04 Jul 12:12 next collapse

Guess it is time to fill in that niche, 😉 😉

AlolanYoda@mander.xyz on 04 Jul 16:17 collapse

My input: I’ve never searched for papers in Scihub directly. I usually find them off Google scholar or something, and then put the paywalled URL or the DOI (an identifier you can usually find in the paywalled website) in Scihub to go to that paper. I don’t think search capabilities are in scihub’s scope.

idiomaddict@lemmy.world on 04 Jul 16:30 collapse

I generally use the DOI, but I did not realize that you could just type in a paywalled url. That might explain it, thanks!

Aggravationstation@feddit.uk on 03 Jul 05:42 next collapse

So making access to information free is helping scientific progress? Wow, who could have imagined that!

General_Effort@lemmy.world on 03 Jul 11:27 next collapse

Careful, lest the AI haters hear that.

Siegfried@lemmy.world on 03 Jul 11:39 next collapse

Free papers = free access to information

LLMs = trash

General_Effort@lemmy.world on 03 Jul 11:56 collapse

The AI haters I’ve seen really hate free access to information. Well, there’s apparently other kinds.

youCanCallMeDragon@lemmy.world on 03 Jul 15:30 collapse

Very misguided.

General_Effort@lemmy.world on 03 Jul 16:00 collapse

ikr?

moriquende@lemmy.world on 03 Jul 19:30 next collapse

In your eyes, what are these AI haters complaining about?

General_Effort@lemmy.world on 03 Jul 19:50 next collapse

Seems to be mainly about property owners not getting enough rent.

moriquende@lemmy.world on 03 Jul 21:26 collapse

I’m not sure you have understood that people don’t want to profit from their data, they want to avoid corporations stealing their private texts and pictures to train models they’ll profit from.

General_Effort@lemmy.world on 03 Jul 23:50 collapse

Is this some weak attempt at gaslighting? If you want to make a career out of this, you really need to up your game. I mean, can you imagine some think tank going: Landlords don’t want to profit from those apartments, they just want to avoid people squatting in them for free.

moriquende@lemmy.world on 04 Jul 06:32 collapse

Your problem is that the landlord analogy just doesn’t suit this situation.

General_Effort@lemmy.world on 04 Jul 10:43 collapse

Rent seeking is long-established economic jargon. It doesn’t necessarily imply a landlord analogy. A landlord may not be extracting an economic rent within that definition.

The point is rent-seeking, not an analogy to landlords.

moriquende@lemmy.world on 04 Jul 11:11 collapse

Precisely, and rent-seeking is what’s not happening here, as nobody is looking to profit. People are only looking to keep their private information private.

General_Effort@lemmy.world on 04 Jul 11:25 collapse

Your gaslighting game is shit. Like Copyright lawsuits aren’t half the news being cheered by AI haters. Not a single privacy lawsuit in sight. How stupid do you think people are?

moriquende@lemmy.world on 04 Jul 12:07 collapse

Assuming you’re right, it’s still not rent-seeking. If I believe that AI companies should be made liable for breaking copyright, I’m not personally receiving any monetary benefit. Where’s my rent?

It’s about principle. It’s unfair that a company can steal data and profit from it. Simple as that.

General_Effort@lemmy.world on 04 Jul 12:32 collapse

Yes, I’m sure very few AI haters will be getting any rent personally. They are supporting rent-seeking by others. I’m sure many do so out of “principle”, or as it would be more commonly phrased, out of ideological dogmatism. I’m a left/liberal guy. I want a society that works for everybody.

moriquende@lemmy.world on 04 Jul 13:39 collapse

A society that works for everybody is a fair society. Stealing intellectual property and user confidential data is not fair.

General_Effort@lemmy.world on 04 Jul 14:00 collapse

And some people will say that a fair society should give back to the King what those revolutionaries stole by creating republics everywhere. You think of your ideology as the one true definition of fairness, justice, and whatever. That’s just ordinary dogmatism.

As far as I’m concerned, society should be ordered to fulfill everyone’s material needs; food, shelter, health care, and such things. Otherwise, people should not be interfered with. They should be free to make the best of life. That is simply incompatible with rent-seeking.

moriquende@lemmy.world on 04 Jul 14:28 collapse

I’m sure you’ll be the first one to provide public access to your private photos and texts so everyone can check how to improve their lives with those valuable resources.

Amazing how propaganda by the rich is so successful in making people believe it’s not them who are the parasites.

General_Effort@lemmy.world on 04 Jul 15:03 collapse

I draw some quiet satisfaction from feeling that I’ve had a positive influence on the world. I really don’t understand why some are so outraged that they may have benefitted some stranger without payment.

Amazing how propaganda by the rich is so successful in making people believe it’s not them who are the parasites.

Look… You believe society should pay money to property owners. Who owns most of the property? Rich people. You have your ideology but don’t treat me like an idiot.

MnemonicBump@lemmy.dbzer0.com on 04 Jul 15:10 next collapse

Hi there. I’m an artist who gives away everything for free because I don’t personally think it’s ethical to profit from pure human emotional expression. I also don’t think it’s ethical for some faceless corporation to profit from my art. I will ABSOLUTELY fight against my art being used to train AI models, but I have ABSOLUTELY no desire to profit. In fact, I have the opposite desire.

So tell me exactly what is rent-seeking?

General_Effort@lemmy.world on 04 Jul 15:23 collapse

So you’re not seeking rent. Good on ya, because no small artist would be getting any appreciable amount of money. The big bucks go to Disney, Adobe, Getty, and the likes of them.

What am I supposed to do with the information you’re giving me?

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rent-seeking

moriquende@lemmy.world on 04 Jul 15:49 collapse

I hope you don’t believe people who are opposed to AI companies stealing data are also simultaneously rooting for big corporations such as the ones you mentioned. That would be a very misguided idea unfortunately.

General_Effort@lemmy.world on 04 Jul 16:22 collapse

Again, don’t treat me like an idiot. Lemmy is full of threads where people cheer on big corporations like Disney when they go to court. I get that you only care about your ideology and not whether Disney, Adobe, or any other of them profits. But that’s how it goes. Either you change your ideology or you accept what kind of world you are fighting for.

moriquende@lemmy.world on 04 Jul 16:30 collapse

I’m on Lemmy everyday and haven’t come across any thread where vast numbers of people are cheering for big companies in any capacity. Of course you’ll probably have some who just want to stick it in the arse to AI companies and don’t think two steps further, but I don’t believe that’s anywhere close to a significant number of people.

moriquende@lemmy.world on 04 Jul 15:47 collapse

You put those words in my mouth, I never said I believe that. I’ve been saying that each person owns their data and have the right to decide what it can be used for.

It’s a separate discussion but: that rich people own most of the assets has a lot to do with the fact they steal and use stolen resources to appropriate more resources. It’s parasitic and needs to stop.

General_Effort@lemmy.world on 04 Jul 16:17 collapse

I’ve been saying that each person owns their data and have the right to decide what it can be used for.

Fair enough, but that’s a really fine point. You can do what you like with your property; use it, make it a gift, destroy it, give it to charity, … But in daily life of most people, property rights are all about money.

Your ideas demand a massive amount of free money for the likes of Disney. On a societal level, that’s basically it. I feel justified in ignoring a few people who have idiosyncratic plans.

ETA:

It’s a separate discussion but: that rich people own most of the assets has a lot to do with the fact they steal and use stolen resources to appropriate more resources. It’s parasitic and needs to stop.

No. Wealth inequality is an unavoidable part of having property. I can find a simulation for you, if you want.

moriquende@lemmy.world on 04 Jul 16:34 collapse

Inequality is fine as long as it isn’t extreme. You can have limits on inequality by implementing rules. In my opinion it’s about finding a balance where neither the richest nor the poorest person strays too far from the median, otherwise you start having trouble and move slowly towards an oligarchy that’ll end in violence and suffering eventually.

General_Effort@lemmy.world on 04 Jul 16:48 collapse

You can have limits on inequality by implementing rules.

Ok. And how would these rules fare against your convictions on property?

moriquende@lemmy.world on 04 Jul 16:56 collapse

Which convictions on property?

General_Effort@lemmy.world on 04 Jul 17:18 collapse

You obviously have strong feelings on intellectual property. What actually are your views on that?

moriquende@lemmy.world on 04 Jul 18:27 collapse

Not sure why you think that but I don’t, I have strong feelings on personal privacy.

I believe you’re constantly trying to steer the conversation into “you and everyone who opposes unethical AI model training only want data owners to get paid”, but it’s not how it is. I want to prevent AI corporations from stealing. It’s a big difference.

General_Effort@lemmy.world on 04 Jul 18:36 collapse

stealing.

Stealing is something you do with property. It’s not something you do with privacy.


So what do you mean by “personal privacy”? Most would consider stuff intentionally made public to be explicitly not private. What actually is the problem?

moriquende@lemmy.world on 04 Jul 19:03 collapse

AI companies are training models on photos and texts posted only for your friends to see in their networks, and worse, also on e-mails, personal images people are backing up, etc. That’s private information. It shouldn’t be used for training models.

With public information that everyone can see it’s from my point of view a gray area. If a magazine takes a public photo and uses it to sell copies, they’re stealing from the artist. But if they take that same photo and use it to train and sell an AI model, it’s a difficult situation to assess. I think our best approach so far is to respect the author’s wishes if they explicitly want to opt out. And yes of course I believe in intellectual property and copyright, if that was your question. They’re there for a reason, and they not only benefit big corporations but also small and independent artists and content creators.

General_Effort@lemmy.world on 04 Jul 19:26 collapse

I companies are training models on photos and texts posted only for your friends

Can you give me an example or two of such a model?

And yes of course I believe in intellectual property and copyright, if that was your question. They’re there for a reason,

Thanks for bringing us back there. That’s the classical conservative argument. It’s not wrong.

One thing you said earlier was: You can have limits on inequality by implementing rules.

So, how do such reforms stack up against your conservatism?

moriquende@lemmy.world on 04 Jul 20:46 collapse

www.theverge.com/meta/694685/meta-ai-camera-roll

Just a recent example. Of course they’re vague about what “public” means, but if you really believe they aren’t using all the photos, you’d be pretty naive in my eyes.

If that’s what you want to call conservative go ahead, although it’s not what I’d typically associate with that word. Not sure where you see the problem? What does taxing wealth at increasing rates to decrease inequality have to do with enforcing intellectual property to protect intellectual workers?

General_Effort@lemmy.world on 04 Jul 23:08 collapse

Just a recent example. Of course they’re vague about what “public” means, but if you really believe they aren’t using all the photos, you’d be pretty naive in my eyes.

Ok. You can’t give an actual example, so you use emotional blackmail to discourage disagreement. Noted.

If that’s what you want to call conservative go ahead, although it’s not what I’d typically associate with that word.

It’s called Chesterton’s fence.

Not sure where you see the problem?

To cut right to the chase. The problem is your intellectual dishonesty. First, it’s privacy, then it’s intellectual property, then privacy again. You try the spiel about sticking it to the corporations. When that is debunked, inequality is fine. Now it’s about “intellectual workers”, as if any of the higher-ups would share the loot.

You don’t give a fuck about logic or reason. You’re just throwing shit at the wall to see what sticks. You’re working through a list of talking points without ever engaging your brain. A third world guy will do that for a dollar an hour.

And don’t tell me that you’re doing this for free. Doing free labor for billionaires so that billionaires can get some free money from the rest of us is the stupidest thing I ever heard of. Ahh. But I have heard of it.

moriquende@lemmy.world on 04 Jul 23:29 collapse

Did you read the article? They’re using your private photos from your camera roll. It is an actual example of what I said. The part I mentioned about public photos was of previously posted photos on Facebook. Please read the article otherwise don’t ask for it.

Well, I’m replying to what you’re asking and arguing about, as you can tell if you reread our thread. I care about both privacy and intellect property. Shouldn’t be that hard to grasp. Also, you’ve just been asking questions and assuming my point of view without ever stating your own stance. Do you believe it’s fine for AI companies to use your personal data and your intellect property to train models they’ll profit from without your consent?

If you want to resort to ad hominem we can say good day and move on, that’s not the point of discussing things here. At least not for me. If you’d like to answer my question about what is contradictory about enforcing wealth taxes and protecting IP at the same time, I’m all ears.

General_Effort@lemmy.world on 05 Jul 16:50 collapse

You asserted that models are trained on private data. You were unable to back up the assertion.

I am not interested in psychological or rhetorical tricks. I see no value in it. If you’re willing to have a rational, fact-based discussion, science-style, then I am willing to assume good faith until evidence to the contrary is apparent.

moriquende@lemmy.world on 05 Jul 17:21 collapse

The article explicitly states a model is being trained on private data.

You have avoided answering any of my questions and resorted to basically name calling. In light of it, I also see no longer any value in talking to you. Have a nice day.

General_Effort@lemmy.world on 03 Jul 21:15 collapse

To be clear, here is what I mean by rent: en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rent-seeking

[deleted] on 03 Jul 21:12 collapse

.

bennieandthez@lemmygrad.ml on 03 Jul 21:28 collapse

no no no you see, putting papers behind paywalls actually incentivizes innovation because… wait what?

General_Effort@lemmy.world on 03 Jul 11:25 next collapse

Woohoo! Play the song!

Zacryon@feddit.org on 03 Jul 16:14 next collapse

Noted. Will upload my future papers on SciHub myself. /j. Or am I? Vsauce music plays Did you know vegetables are a social construct?

Alteon@lemmy.world on 03 Jul 16:31 next collapse

Thanks Dropout!

LovableSidekick@lemmy.world on 03 Jul 19:48 collapse

A sandwich is also a social construct. But not every social construct is also a sandwich.

ftbd@feddit.org on 03 Jul 16:25 next collapse

This is why you put the preprint on arxiv

sommerset@thelemmy.club on 04 Jul 14:10 collapse

Explain more

LovableSidekick@lemmy.world on 03 Jul 19:47 next collapse

Dunno what Sci-Hub is, but most researchers are happy to send you a copy of their paper on request - and this is completely legal. Their email address is usually on the abstract.

icelimit@lemmy.ml on 03 Jul 21:47 next collapse

Adding up to days in the best scenarios to any research study when scihub or arxiv cuts it down to seconds. Because no one cares about time.

thedeadwalking4242@lemmy.world on 03 Jul 21:51 next collapse

I have never ever gotten a response from a researcher :(

LovableSidekick@lemmy.world on 03 Jul 21:56 next collapse

That’s too bad - I’ve seen posts from scientists, or people who claim to be, saying what I said.

notthebees@reddthat.com on 04 Jul 12:17 next collapse

Probably depends on if theyre still at the institution the research was done.

doctordevice@lemmy.ca on 04 Jul 14:13 collapse

As the first author of a fair few papers during grad school, I don’t have that email address anymore. ¯\_(ツ)_/¯ Also not in academia.

notthebees@reddthat.com on 04 Jul 15:27 collapse

I was trying to get more info on a paper I read for a final project in my senior year. Couldn’t get anything back. Their PhD thesis was on spotted lanternflies and how temps impact them

Shelena@feddit.nl on 04 Jul 14:24 collapse

I am a scientist and you are right. If I get a message asking for my work, I will send it. It will also make me happy that someone is interested. It happens regularly, usually via researchgate.

modality@lemmy.myserv.one on 04 Jul 15:46 next collapse

Yo can I get a copy of your work?

Shelena@feddit.nl on 05 Jul 05:41 collapse

Sure, what is your email address?

Magnum@lemmy.dbzer0.com on 05 Jul 01:18 collapse

Plesse send me a copy too

Shelena@feddit.nl on 05 Jul 05:41 collapse

If you send me your emailadress I will send you some papers

Magnum@lemmy.dbzer0.com on 05 Jul 20:37 collapse

PMd you my mail

[deleted] on 04 Jul 16:42 collapse

.

Shanedino@lemmy.world on 04 Jul 16:50 next collapse

I think this is a limited viewpoint, its more grey than you are making it out to be.

chemikyle@lemmy.zip on 04 Jul 18:42 next collapse

Lazily reasoned misanthropic nonsense, if every scientist were of this zero-sum mindset they’d all have long since transitioned to industry roles in engineering for the higher average pay alone.

Raylon@lemmy.world on 04 Jul 21:19 collapse

I’m a researcher and i would gladly send anyone a paper who asks, without a reason needed. Although all my papers are open access anyways so shrugs. Btw it’s also not unusual that people may just ask some questions related to ones paper via email and im always happy to answer those. I believe that most researchers are always glad to share their expertise and findings (as long as it isn’t a huge effort ofc).

AeonFelis@lemmy.world on 03 Jul 22:30 collapse

Why wouldn’t they be? It’s not like they’re getting royalties from these journals…

ILikeBoobies@lemmy.ca on 04 Jul 01:16 collapse

Not owning it can get them in trouble for sharing

It depends on the publishing agreement

x0x7@lemmy.world on 04 Jul 11:59 next collapse

Isn’t it odd that researchers who should be pros at caring about and finding the most correct metrics for every topic are obsessed with a proxy for quality that is just about the most disjoint possible? It should be embarrassing.

Allero@lemmy.today on 04 Jul 12:47 collapse

Unfortunately, it’s commonly not researchers that create academic circles, it is publishers and other entities with vested interest in making us publish more garbage.

Scientific world is corrupt as hell.

sommerset@thelemmy.club on 04 Jul 12:16 collapse

She knows not to travel. The organizer.

But tbh - even zlibrary creators got away from Argentina, they should make a movie about it one day.