Be Alexandra Elbakyan

(twitter.com)

117 points | by DanielleMolloy 19 hours ago ago

19 comments

  • onetimeusename 16 hours ago ago

    So I imagine, with some irony, that she can avoid US courts because Russia doesn't have an extradition agreement. To some extent, it seems like content sharing apps are often Russia based. So evading shutdown in Western nations requires a hostile regime. So free access to Western, public-funded, scientific research relies on Russian networks and jurisdiction often.

    • ahartmetz 12 hours ago ago

      When the system is so bad that fighting it improves it. It's a standard feature of a decent, non-totalitarian political system that it improves that way. Just don't tell Putin. But he wouldn't get it anyway. Totalitarian and democratic regimes often have basic problems understanding each other.

    • ls612 14 hours ago ago

      Also why Rutracker is by far the best public tracker.

      • r721 11 hours ago ago

        Rutracker is blocked in Russia.

        • ls612 2 hours ago ago

          Isn't that because they are anti-Putin not because of copyright?

          • r721 19 minutes ago ago

            It definitely started with copyright infringement dispute in 2015 (with Russian authors/publishers though), and I don't remember any anti-Putin statements from them (though it's possible I missed something).

  • mjd 17 hours ago ago

    She's a hero.

  • ipsum2 17 hours ago ago

    is Sci-Hub still updated for new papers?

  • stefantalpalaru 5 hours ago ago

    [dead]

  • qzgrid37 16 hours ago ago

    [dead]

  • ChrisArchitect 16 hours ago ago
  • renewiltord 15 hours ago ago

    These massive green text attempts started becoming common recently and honestly they’re excruciatingly boring. Misses the entire value of the medium. Very “hello, fellow kids”.

    • 15 hours ago ago
      [deleted]
  • metadat 17 hours ago ago

    The Elsevier reply is infuriating. The system is broken.

    https://nitter.space/MushtaqBilalPhD/status/2049485871699931...

    • Revanche1367 17 hours ago ago

      That’s not a reply, it’s sarcasm by the same poster pretending to speak for the publisher as a joke.

      • d0mine 13 hours ago ago

        What part of the reply is not factually correct? (premium gold+ open access article for $50000?)

        • Revanche1367 8 hours ago ago

          I didn’t say it wasn’t factually correct. I assumed it was mostly correct, perhaps a bit sensationalist for comedic purposes. I found it quite funny actually. My answer above was just that it was not actually written by the Elsevier company like that user seems to have thought.

    • crest 17 hours ago ago

      Some people look best in the warm glow of their own pyre.

    • hmartin 17 hours ago ago

      Um......