Timeline for Bulk download Sci-Hub papers [closed]
Current License: CC BY-SA 3.0
37 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Feb 23, 2021 at 22:45 | history | edited | einpoklum |
edited tags
|
|
| S Sep 23, 2017 at 23:16 | history | suggested | aplaice | CC BY-SA 3.0 |
Fix cross-post URL
|
| Sep 23, 2017 at 20:40 | review | Suggested edits | |||
| S Sep 23, 2017 at 23:16 | |||||
| Sep 20, 2017 at 23:39 | review | Reopen votes | |||
| Sep 21, 2017 at 6:43 | |||||
| Apr 13, 2017 at 12:57 | history | edited | CommunityBot |
replaced http://opendata.stackexchange.com/ with https://opendata.stackexchange.com/
|
|
| Apr 13, 2017 at 12:49 | history | edited | CommunityBot |
replaced http://academia.stackexchange.com/ with https://academia.stackexchange.com/
|
|
| Mar 21, 2017 at 19:48 | review | Reopen votes | |||
| Mar 22, 2017 at 1:46 | |||||
| Mar 21, 2017 at 5:39 | history | edited | Ooker | CC BY-SA 3.0 |
added 187 characters in body
|
| Feb 11, 2017 at 1:04 | review | Reopen votes | |||
| Feb 11, 2017 at 14:58 | |||||
| Nov 26, 2016 at 17:23 | review | Reopen votes | |||
| Nov 26, 2016 at 22:05 | |||||
| Jun 11, 2016 at 7:45 | review | Reopen votes | |||
| Jun 11, 2016 at 11:52 | |||||
| Jun 1, 2016 at 6:43 | history | edited | Franck Dernoncourt | CC BY-SA 3.0 |
edited body
|
| Feb 19, 2016 at 3:03 | review | Reopen votes | |||
| Feb 19, 2016 at 9:45 | |||||
| Feb 16, 2016 at 16:55 | comment | added | Franck Dernoncourt | @amoeba understood, sorry I thought you meant the question would indicate how to download all papers from libgen. I agree then it's more a comment. | |
| Feb 16, 2016 at 16:49 | comment | added | amoeba | I don't think it is obvious how to download all papers from libgen. So the answer saying "download all papers from libgen" is only begging the question. Presumably the good answer would contain the specific instructions on how to download all papers from libgen... | |
| Feb 16, 2016 at 16:45 | comment | added | Franck Dernoncourt | @amoeba Why wouldn't it be a useful answer? It sounds to me as giving a solution. | |
| Feb 16, 2016 at 16:44 | comment | added | amoeba | This is not a useful answer. You can update your question to ask how to download the dump of libgen. That is the relevant question here. | |
| Feb 16, 2016 at 16:42 | comment | added | Franck Dernoncourt | @amoeba sure a valid (and afaik correct) answer is to say no paper are stored on sci-hub but one should download the dump from libgen.. | |
| Feb 16, 2016 at 16:40 | comment | added | amoeba | You need to ask how to download libgen, not sci-hub: that's the library where downloaded papers are stored. Libgen offers to download its database dump (libgen.io/dbdumps/ -- if this link does not work in your country, try typing the address in hideme.ru or similar). I see there two dumps, one is 350 Gb and another 3 Tb, no idea what the difference is. In any case, after you have the dump you can set up your bittorrent client to download the whole library (around 40 Tb with all books and papers). That is how one can set up a mirror of libgen. | |
| Feb 14, 2016 at 23:19 | comment | added | jakebeal | Meta question about this question: meta.academia.stackexchange.com/q/2219/22733 | |
| Feb 14, 2016 at 22:50 | comment | added | tomasz | @FedericoPoloni: Another reason to not obey. Though it wouldn't hurt to be careful. | |
| Feb 14, 2016 at 15:00 | comment | added | Federico Poloni | Be careful - the last time someone tried to download a massive amount of academic papers from a website it didn't end well. | |
| Feb 14, 2016 at 12:34 | comment | added | svavil | Step 1 will be getting your storage ready. An estimate of sci-hub volume was at 40 Tbytes (see comments in vk.com/wall-36928352_7448, in Russian). | |
| Feb 14, 2016 at 11:39 | comment | added | svavil | @tomasz As far as I know, libgen is holding a copy of every paper that sci-hub has ever got their hands on. | |
| Feb 14, 2016 at 4:37 | comment | added | Franck Dernoncourt | @tomasz No paper is a valid answer. I guess I'll just look at it myself without the possibility of sharing the answer here, since the question got closed. They may save PDFs that got queried, I believe some similar services were doing so. E.g. libgen -> reddit.com/r/Scholar/comments/39dtdf/libgen_mirror Also, moscow.sci-hub.bz/ccc288e1864c9588274a4de0bd9ff766/… | |
| Feb 14, 2016 at 4:36 | review | Reopen votes | |||
| Feb 14, 2016 at 12:41 | |||||
| Feb 14, 2016 at 4:00 | comment | added | tomasz | This is to say, there are no papers "stored in Sci-Hub", as far as I know. Still, I think the downvotes are excessive, so have an upvote. | |
| Feb 14, 2016 at 3:58 | comment | added | tomasz | @FranckDernoncourt: I think the real issue here is not legality, but rather the fact that arXiv hosts the files, while Sci-Hub merely acts as a proxy to get around paywalls; it can't let you access any interface (in order to, say, enable bulk download) except that which is given by the publishers. Frankly, I very much doubt there is a way to use Sci-Hub to mass-download papers without effectively DDoSing the service, which, ignoring the legal issues, would be simply unethical IMHO. | |
| Feb 14, 2016 at 0:24 | history | closed |
David Richerby jakebeal Massimo Ortolano Bill Barth vonbrand |
Not suitable for this site | |
| Feb 13, 2016 at 23:10 | comment | added | Franck Dernoncourt | @DavidRicherby Sure but I clearly linked them in the question. | |
| Feb 13, 2016 at 22:56 | comment | added | David Richerby | @FranckDernoncourt Thinking that one question should be closed in no way obliges me to check every other question on similar topics. | |
| Feb 13, 2016 at 22:10 | review | Close votes | |||
| Feb 14, 2016 at 0:25 | |||||
| Feb 13, 2016 at 22:09 | comment | added | Franck Dernoncourt | @jakebeal Sci-hub is much larger than arXiv in terms of number of papers. Also, Sci-hub is over 4 year-old. As for the legal aspect, it's up to the court to decide, and that shouldn't impact whether the question gets closed anyway. | |
| Feb 13, 2016 at 22:00 | comment | added | jakebeal | @FranckDernoncourt Because Sci-Hub is a recent venture of dubious legal status and no original content, while arXiv is a massive, long-standing joint venture that shapes the publication practices of several entire fields. | |
| Feb 13, 2016 at 21:56 | comment | added | Franck Dernoncourt | @DavidRicherby So how about the two arXiv questions? Why didn't you vote to close them, since they are the same question but for another website? | |
| Feb 13, 2016 at 21:54 | comment | added | David Richerby | I'm voting to close this question as off-topic because it is about the features offered by a particular website. | |
| Feb 13, 2016 at 21:20 | history | asked | Franck Dernoncourt | CC BY-SA 3.0 |