The relevance is that every citizen of the UK currently enjoys a standard of living that is a direct result of that resource usage. So to answer your question, yes, everyone is responsible, unless they suddenly decide to go live the life of a hermit.
Yeah, if that happened, that would be new data that would need explaining, in the context of evolution.
Piracy very often is the social pressure that drives innovation and positive change. Look at the rise of the video streaming industry. That wouldn’t have happened if not for people otherwise opting for the more convenient option of pirating.
Its unfortunate, but as things currently stand, Sci-Hub isn’t just some niche project, but is essential for science. The reason we have publishers scrambling to fight is that they on the other hand, are not essential to the scientific process. In this day and age, they bring no value to the table, and they’ve realised this.
UEFI allows us to create EFI stubs that combine the inititrd and other things into one little image that can be signed & verified by Secure Boot, and read by the UEFI boot-selection/loader. This solves most of the issues described. Like the article says, the issue is that Linux distros do not use those capabilities by default yet.
This is a really nice initiative, but I think its got the thrust a bit wrong. Requiring Open-Access just sets journals on the predatory path of requiring authors to pay.
The demand should instead be for journals to mandate preprint archival (and no embargo on updating it with post-peer-review changes other than journal-enhanced formatting).
Isn’t the data that you seen in the profile, all of the data that Lemmy has? Or do you mean IP logs and history as well?
How does deletion currently work? Do all posts disappear when an account is deleted?
For people that don’t remember, what did Firefox look like before version 4.0?
Is there some way to see a list of instances that are currently being federated with?
Double-blind peer review is already being tried out, and is a good way to go about it, but is rendered pointless under preprint culture, which, I feel is more important to preserve and promote.
I think the better solution is to have “open” peer review, where the review reports are also published, so that it becomes obvious when a shoddy job has been done, as affected by the Matthew principle.
Its a bit odd though, that the group does not have a representative from https://arxiv.org/ , which I would consider to be one of, if not THE most important pre-print archive:
I guess it is okay, but only as long as there are prerequisites determining what courses you can then go on to do. What doesn’t make sense is them mandating bridge courses for students who haven’t studied what might be needed. Universities already do not have enough faculty to teach regular courses; would they have enough for these?
I would really like to know the answer to this as well.
Where i live, we’re supposed to segregate waste into three bins: a blue one for plastics and other non-biodegradables, a green one for compostables and a red one for human sanitary waste.
Do nail clippings go in green or the red?
Hmm… their outright rejection of papers without detailing reasons is very concerning.