Oops, dropped these:

How to find things:

  1. Use Anna’s Archive (linked above). It uses their database in their search, as well as Libgen and others.

  2. There’s also a Telegram bot for Scihub and Libgen which are handy: https://www.reddit.com/r/scihub/s/5p7FCk1IOH https://github.com/1337w0rm/Libgen-Telegram-Bot

  3. Their Tor links are on wiki: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sci-Hub?wprov=sfla1 (check out the see also sections too). Requires a Tor capable browser: https://www.torproject.org/ or https://brave.com/ (Chromium)

  4. For direct links: https://www.reddit.com/r/scihub/s/k6hFIhh51w

  5. Use this free VPN if you don’t have one. You will not be able to connect without it on many connections: https://protonvpn.com/

If you cannot find what you need, you have options:

  1. You can post on Wosonhj (above)

  2. Post on Twitter or Masto with the tag #icanhazpdf

  3. Search Research Gate

  4. Email the author

  5. https://unpaywall.org

  6. Many unis require an open access preprint be hosted somewhere these days (worth checking).

More tools:

  • Kidplayer_666@lemm.eeEnglish
    0·
    1 year ago

    Given the entire scientific community uses this, how the hell do journals still make any money at all?

      • Kidplayer_666@lemm.eeEnglish
        0·
        1 year ago

        Jesus christ. Proposal. All scientists agree they’ll publish to Wikipedia and donate 50€

        • runner_g@lemmy.blahaj.zoneEnglish
          0·
          1 year ago

          Yeah it’s nuts. However there are a huge number of open-access journals, and they are becoming more common. BMC/PLOS are the big ones in my field (biology/genetics).

          PLOS still charges a fee if your institution is not part of their “network”, and it’s not cheap, but their articles are free for all to access.

    • glans [it/its]@hexbear.netEnglish
      0·
      1 year ago

      Wikipedia’s Sci-Hub:

      In December 2022, in the journal Information Development, an academic researcher survey found, when confronted by a paywall, they try to find an open-access version, then ask colleagues with other credentials, then use shadow libraries.[2] 57% of respondents have used shadow libraries while 36% of respondents were unaware that shadow libraries exist.[2]

      In other words, whether you use grassroots, collectivized forms of knowledge centralization (aka “shadow libraries”) in your work depends entirely on whether you are aware they are an option. Those who know, use. Most know.

      (That is one of more boring parts of that wikipedia page.)