Doesn't Anna's Archive already include a full backup of Sci-Hub and distribute it via Torrent and IPFS in addition to their website and the providers and mirrors they usually use for uploading?
this post was submitted on 24 Dec 2024
9 points (100.0% liked)
Piracy: ꜱᴀɪʟ ᴛʜᴇ ʜɪɢʜ ꜱᴇᴀꜱ
56776 readers
11 users here now
⚓ 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):
🏴☠️ Other communities
Torrenting:
- !seedboxes@lemmy.dbzer0.com
- !trackers@lemmy.dbzer0.com
- !qbittorrent@lemmy.dbzer0.com
- !libretorrent@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 |
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
Scihub database stops in 2021. Big win for corporate publishers and wealthy scientists; they've had an edge since then. It's super important to have access to up to date resources. The database here seems to fill the gap - Merry Christmas to me!!
Anna's Archive allows new uploads though. From their website:
We have the full Sci-Hub collection, as well as new papers.
Wrong. Annas Archive doesn't Accept Uploads directly themselves (at least <10.000), and they recommend STC too.
To upload academic papers, please also (in addition to Library Genesis) upload to STC Nexus. They are the best shadow library for new papers.
I think they stopped endorsing IPFS. I can't find a good source right now. If you wan't to support Anna's Archive, you can help seed their torrents. They don't seem to have that much redundancy.
You're right.
We’ve decided that IPFS is not yet ready for prime time. We’ll still link to files on IPFS from Anna’s Archive when possible, but we won’t host it ourselves anymore, nor do we recommend others to mirror using IPFS. Please see our Torrents page if you want to help preserve our collection.
I'm curious, could anyone more knowledgeable about IPFS give an impression of the state of the protocol? It seems like a really interesting technology, but it also leans heavily into web3 and crypto bullshit. It's that reflective of the network, or just bad marketing?
It seems like most big projects have dropped it. I remember reading one of the big fall backs was it has one central node hosting via cloudflare then they dropped it or something. Only half remembering. It sounds so cool! Sad it doesn’t work
Can confirm. Meddled with it a little bit a while ago trying to productively use it to host Lutris installer files. It's an absolute mess; slow, unreliable, without proper documentation and a really bad default node application.
Also it managed to get our server temporarily banned by the hosting provider since the "sane default settings" includes the node doing a whole sweep of your local subnet on all NICs respectively, knocking at multiple ports of every device it can find. Because the expected environment of a node apparently is your home network… a default setting that caused problems for many people for many years by now.
A project like in this post might benefit from looking at more modern/mature reimplementations of IPFS' concept, like Veilid (which would also offer additional features as well).
It had me up until 'AI'.
If you do it right, you can have that AI replace all the complicated pirating and downloading process. I think someone already came up with a paper writer AI. You just give it the topic, and it fabricates a whole paper, including nice diagrams and pictures. 😅
Yeah, but that also made me worry. I wonder how AI and science mix. Supposedly, some researchers use AI. Especially "Retrieval-Augmented Generation" (information retrieval) and such. I'm not a scientist, but I didn't have much luck with AI and factual information. It just makes a lot of stuff up. To the point where I'm better off without.
If you do it right, you can have that AI replace all the complicated pirating and downloading process.
How so? I don't see how that would work.
What are you trying to say about an AI fabricating a whole paper? It must have the same issues all trained statistical text prediction "AI" has: Hallucinations. Even if it's extended with sources, without validating them the paper text claims are useless when you can't be sure the source even exists or says what it claims.
There are use cases for AI, but if you are looking for papers for reasoned and documented information, AI is the worst you can use. Because it may look correct, but be confidently incorrect, and you are being misled.
This post is about scientific papers. Not predicted generated text.
Yeah, I think my sarcasm got lost somewhere. I thought the word "fabricate", especially in context with facts had that slight undertone. But I'm not a native english speaker, maybe I'm wrong.
I've linked some paper generators somewhere in this comment tree. They're not supposed to come up with real scientific papers. One of them is an old joke (predating AI), the next one is itself the subject of research. And with the third one, I'm not so sure. Seems like intended use is to fake papers.
I also think "hallucinations" are a major hurdle when it comes to applying AI. It comes to no surprise to me that they do it... I mean we've trained them on all kinds of data, the Wikipedia, textbooks, but also fictional stories, novels, Reddit posts... And we want them to be creative. Except when we don't. But there (currently) is no set-screw, no means of controlling when we want it to stick to the facts, and when we want it to be creative or invent something, write a science fiction novel... It certainly doesn't help if the use-case is writing factual text, or helping a customer facing issues with a bill... And the chatbot decides to be extra creative or mimick an angry Reddit user. It'll do it. Because we've designed it that way.
I guess it helps to make AI more intelligent, so the chances of it infering/guessing what to do become a bit better. But I think what we really want is some means to steer it more directly. And that'll open up more use-cases for AI. Currently, we don't have any of that. So regarding factual stuff, AI is just very unreliable.
And if you ask me, ChatGPT, Claude etc aren't even close to being smart enough to write a scientific paper. So that'd be yet another issue. I know people regularly claim it can pass some test for a degree, be smarter than a student... But from my own experience, ChatGPT can't even summarize a 2 page newspaper article. All results I've ever seen are riddled with inaccuracies, and most of the times also missing the entire point of the article. I've rarely been happy with how it reworded my emails. And I let it write some hobby computer code for me. And it did a great job at writing boilerplate code, some webdesign etc. But failed miserably with the more complex things I really needed some help with. How would that thing be able to do research on it's own?
Don't get me wrong, I think AI and LLMs are very useful. They can assist, retrieve documents... They excel at translating between languages. I also like chatbots for their creativity. You can just tell them to come up with 5 ideas concerning whatever you're currently doing. But there are a lot of things they can not do. And it's probably going to stay that way for a while. Until some major (hypothetical) breaktrough, when we suddenly make them 10x as intelligent. And/Or get rid of hallucinations.