Sci-Hub 2024 Year End Review (English Translation)

Sci-Hub 2024 year end review is translated to English by Kagi Translate from Russian. Original text can be found in Sci-Hub’s telegram channel https://t.me/freescience.

RESULTS OF 2024

First. The project received donations totaling 2 million dollars in meme coins.

The project is actively used by many students in China, which is why a group of Sci-Hub fans has emerged there. As far as I understand, the organizer of the group is actively interested in the topic of cryptocurrencies (even wrote a book). Somewhere in mid-November, the Chinese launched a meme coin in honor of the Sci-Hub project. At its peak, the coin’s price reached 5 cents, and now it is somewhere around 1-2 cents. This means that the exchange rate of the Sci-Hub cryptocurrency is now almost equal to the ruble exchange rate (100 to one or so).

In general, I converted part of these donations into normal, traditional cryptocurrency (like Bitcoin) and paid for servers several months in advance. The other part is still sitting in meme coins—I hope that the token will still grow in price (there is a promotion plan). Of course, this is risky, but Sci-Hub is a project that is not afraid of risk. Therefore, anyone who wants to invest in Sci-Hub by purchasing this token can do so here: www.coingecko.com/en/coins/sci-hub

Second. A dissertation on the topic of open scientific knowledge has been defended at the Institute of Philosophy.

For those interested in the history and philosophy of science, I defended a dissertation in April at the Institute of Philosophy on the topic that scientific knowledge should be open (otherwise, it is strange to call it scientific at all). The work shows that open communication is one of the basic traditional values of science when considering science as a social institution. In other words, journals that charge for access to scientific articles are a kind of ‘non-traditional orientation journals.’

Moreover, openness is an important prerequisite for rationality. Rationality is not limited to the criterion of falsification (hello Popper); it is a much more complex concept.

You can familiarize yourself with the text of the dissertation here: web.archive.org/web/20240425100014/https://iphras.ru/page26414303.htm (I provide the link through the web archive because the Institute’s website, strangely enough, is glitching again at the time of writing this post).

All criticism and comments (as well as praise) regarding the dissertation can be sent to my email.

Third. Work has begun on a new declaration of open access to scientific knowledge.

Currently, all discussions on the topic of open science are conducted within the frameworks defined by the so-called BBB declarations back in 2001-2003. Within these frameworks, two main types of open access are recognized: gold, meaning open journals with an author-pays model, and green, which refers to repositories like the well-known arXiv. We can also add the so-called diamond open access, which includes open journals that are free for both authors and readers.

However, since 2003, internet technologies have advanced significantly. Today, we can already talk about such types of open access as blue (through academic social networks) or red (your beloved Sci-Hub). It is time to adopt a new declaration of open access to scientific knowledge that corresponds to the current state of scientific and technological progress.

A preliminary version of the declaration can be read and signed here: open.science.do

We will be more actively engaged in this in the coming year. Signing the declaration is an important step towards recognizing access to scientific knowledge through sites like Sci-Hub or Libgen as completely legal and ceasing to pursue them—first in the former USSR, and then in all countries of the world.

Fourth. In 2024, about one billion articles were downloaded through Sci-Hub. Despite the fact that this is unfiltered statistics, the fact remains: the popularity of the project has not decreased but only grown, despite the fact that Sci-Hub has not been updated for quite a long time. Of course, this does not mean that the site will not be updated at all now—just that the patient is more alive than dead (no matter how much some haters might wish otherwise).

The cause of open access to scientific knowledge will definitely prevail—because good always triumphs over evil.

In the new year, I wish all scientists new discoveries and large grants. Happy New Year, comrades!