[HN Gopher] ACM Digital Library Archive is Open Access with 50 Y...
___________________________________________________________________
ACM Digital Library Archive is Open Access with 50 Years of
Published Records
Author : yarapavan
Score : 349 points
Date : 2022-05-20 13:58 UTC (9 hours ago)
(HTM) web link (dl.acm.org)
(TXT) w3m dump (dl.acm.org)
| khaledh wrote:
| Original announcement thread:
| https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=30944881
| flakiness wrote:
| So some people already posted now-accessible papers that worth a
| look. Here is my random pick: "A relational model of data for
| large shared data banks" [1]
|
| It's a defining paper for RDB data model. I think it's not a
| exaggeration to say all the RDB history starts here. (The history
| itself is covered not by acm but by ieee [2]).
|
| [1] https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.1145/362384.362685
|
| [2]
| https://scholar.google.com/scholar?cluster=16074372884446179...
| teloli wrote:
| And interestingly enough such a landmark paper got rejected
| initially: http://www.fang.ece.ufl.edu/reject.html
| hazelnut-tree wrote:
| This is a treasure chest of computer-related papers from 1951 -
| 2000. The topics span the full breadth of computing, including
| topics that might not immediately come to mind.
|
| An example: I posted a 1984 paper about end-user documentation
| for all types of users (including developers) from the ACM
| archive. Despite the age of the paper, you'll recognise the
| questions about documentation even today.
|
| _' Those silly bastards': A report on some users' views of
| documentation (1984)_
| https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=31003306
| maire wrote:
| Documentation and user interface face the same issues.
|
| The biggest mistake engineers make is to expose the internal
| workings of the software in ways irrelevant to the user.
|
| The biggest mistake marketing makes is to focus on upselling. I
| believe this is the reason why Google beat out Yahoo in the
| search space.
| muxneo wrote:
| An immense benefit to the technical community..thanks a lot
| taubek wrote:
| As a student I've often used their DL. I really had a bunch of
| great resources.
| musesum wrote:
| In 1975, my high school's "Independent Science Study" class took
| a field trip to the Crerar Library at the U of Chicago[1]. In the
| stacks was a paper on AI that changed my life[2].
|
| It was a 3 hour drive, each way. Now it takes 3 seconds.
|
| [1] https://goo.gl/maps/h3xCccBMQDBqQXhD7
|
| [2] https://dl.acm.org/doi/pdf/10.1145/1460833.1460840
| ThomasBHickey wrote:
| I worked as a librarian there in the early 70's. It was a
| different world!
| dwringer wrote:
| Wow, this is great! I'm happy to see "Connection Machine Lisp:
| Fine-Grained Parallel Symbolic Processing"[0] in here, free at
| last. I actually bought that paper in my undergrad CS days just
| because it's so intriguing (IMHO).
|
| [0] https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.1145/319838.319870
| robomartin wrote:
| Ah, cool, a paper I wrote back in 1985 is now open access. It
| only took 37 years.
|
| Well, at least I can send my kid (recent CS grad) a link and he
| can laugh at what was doing almost 40 years ago. Robotics then
| wasn't what it is today!
| ghostpepper wrote:
| You should link to the paper so we can all laugh!
| SemanticStrengh wrote:
| Is there a way to filter by number of reads popularity? Number of
| citations?
| webmaven wrote:
| Yes, search results can be sorted by citations.
| status200 wrote:
| All of the articles that I have searched/browsed are requiring
| login / payment... am I missing something?
| yarapavan wrote:
| Announcement: https://associationsnow.com/2022/05/the-way-things-
| were-why-...
|
| ...as a part of its landmark campaign for its 75th anniversary
| celebrations, ACM is opening up a large portion of its archives,
| making the first 50 years of its published records--more than
| 117,500 documents dating from 1951 to 2000--accessible to the
| public without a login.
|
| * A paper from the inaugural issue of ACM Transactions on
| Mathematical Software in 1975:
| https://dl.acm.org/doi/pdf/10.1145/355626.355636
|
| * The UNIX time-sharing system by Ritchie & Thompson.
| https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.1145/800009.808045
|
| * A Conversation with Steve Jobs.
| https://dl.acm.org/doi/pdf/10.1145/63334.63336
|
| Edit: More info -
|
| In January 2020, ACM launched an ambitious five-year plan to
| transition the Association into an Open Access Publisher. The
| foundation of that plan is a new model called ACM Open, which
| asks research institutions around the world to underwrite the
| costs of publication for their affiliated authors. Over the past
| two years, nearly 200 research institutions have already signed
| on to ACM Open and ACM is fast approaching the first major
| milestone for the transition, when approximately 20% of ACM's
| newly published articles are Open Access upon publication in the
| ACM Digital Library.
|
| Source: https://cacm.acm.org/magazines/2022/5/260362-thanks-for-
| the-...
| shortformblog wrote:
| Hey, can we get a mod to update the headline? I think the lack
| of info about the time period is confusing people about what's
| available and what's not. (I wrote the announcement piece
| linked here, FYI.)
| ArtWomb wrote:
| 50 years of SIGGRAPH, looking forward to it ;)
| dagmx wrote:
| Sort of. For most production related content in the ACM
| library, you'll still only get the abstracts.
| musicale wrote:
| SIGGRAPH is behind the times. SIGCOMM has been open access
| for years.
|
| It's a shame too since SIGGRAPH runs ACM's most popular
| conference(s) with many thousands of attendees and high
| registration fees ($875 "discounted" pregistration for a
| virtual conference? are you kidding?) and can almost
| certainly afford the negligible costs for digital
| publication.
|
| Well here's hoping we'll get real open access for
| everything by ... 2025. ;-/
|
| Until then: google scholar, sci-hub, or donate your $99 to
| ACM.
| [deleted]
| musicale wrote:
| > asks research institutions around the world to underwrite the
| costs of publication for their affiliated authors
|
| The actual marginal cost for a digital publication is
| negligible, as demonstrated by arxiv.org, archive.org, and sci-
| hub.
|
| The reason why ACM and IEEE charge so much for digital library
| access is that they use the money for unrelated purposes.
| seoaeu wrote:
| Unrelated to the narrow task of file hosting, but entirely
| related to the missions of those nonprofit organizations.
| Some of the fees go towards the cost for hosting subsequent
| iterations of the very conferences the papers were presented
| at
| pridkett wrote:
| While peer review isn't perfect - it's helpful. Arxiv isn't
| peer reviewed. Most things in ACM journals and conferences
| are. That process costs money because it takes people and
| time to do it well. Journal subscriptions are often not
| enough to recover those costs.
|
| As for sci-hub? They're just taking the finished work. It's
| like saying software shouldn't cost much because The Pirate
| Bay can deliver software for free.
| mrek0 wrote:
| The reviewers don't get paid for doing the reviews in the
| peer review system..
| ThomasBHickey wrote:
| Publication in an ACM journal involves a lot more than just
| accepting a paper as-is.
| aluminussoma wrote:
| The link for "The UNIX time-sharing system" only provides a
| 1-page PDF of the abstract. I believe the correct PDF is
| located at: https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.1145/361011.361061
|
| It wasn't clear to me by looking at the pages themselves. I
| hope usability will not be a huge issue and negate the benefit
| of this open access!
| shortformblog wrote:
| Hey, the author of the piece. For context here: I included
| the link to the 1973 abstract rather than the 1974 document
| because it was the first mention of UNIX in the ACM archive,
| which I made clear in the piece but got a little lost in the
| comment here.
| ghostpepper wrote:
| Off topic but does anyone happen to know why the announcement
| page returns a 403 when accessed from a command line browser
| (lynx)?
| est31 wrote:
| I remember reading up on Karp's 21 problems paper and
| encountering the paper from Cook that established that boolean
| satisfiability was NP complete. It was published in ACM, very
| glad that it's available now:
| https://dl.acm.org/doi/pdf/10.1145/800157.805047
| retcon wrote:
| I don't mean this negatively at all but I am daydreaming of a
| time machine and taking this decision back to 1995 and tripping
| over all the technology fads we might have been spared. Good.
| This is what makes it worth having children for.
| WalterGR wrote:
| It would appear this isn't a time-limited thing:
|
| > Vicki L. Hanson, the group's CEO, noted that the ACM Digital
| Library initiative is part of a broader effort to make its
| archives available via open access by 2025.
|
| > "Our goal is to have it open in a few years, but there's very
| real costs associated with [the open-access work]," Hanson said.
| "We have models so that we can pay for it."
| musicale wrote:
| USENIX has been open access for years. Some ACM conferences and
| journals (e.g. SIGCOMM/CCR) have been open access for several
| years.
|
| One step that ACM could take that wouldn't require any
| technical changes to their existing infrastructure would be to
| officially offer republication and redistribution rights to any
| non-commercial digital library including arxiv.org,
| archive.org, sci-hub, etc..
| freefaler wrote:
| It's sad that we still need scihub for the research already paid
| in many cases by the taxpayers.
|
| So scihub FTW!
| mark_l_watson wrote:
| I just searched for something at random, selected the first
| search hit, and since I am no longer a member of the ACM, there
| was a $15 charge to read the article.
| czx4f4bd wrote:
| It says that open access only covers articles from 1951 to
| 2000.
| protomyth wrote:
| You can change the search to only search from 1951 to 2000 on
| the left sidebar.
| tokai wrote:
| Its very nice that they made all those articles available. But it
| is definitely not 50 years of published records made Open Access.
| OA mirrors FOSS software in some ways and the users need many of
| the same freedoms. Just making them available to read with the
| same old copyright still attach is not enough.
|
| The Budapest Declaration from 2002 that defined OA for the first
| time states it very clearly: "By "open access" to
| this literature, we mean its free availability on the public
| internet, permitting any users to read, download, copy,
| distribute, print, search, or link to the full texts of these
| articles, crawl them for indexing, pass them as data to software,
| or use them for any other lawful purpose, without financial,
| legal, or technical barriers other than those inseparable from
| gaining access to the internet itself."
|
| https://www.budapestopenaccessinitiative.org/read/
| wolverine876 wrote:
| Good points, but what is the copyright?
| [deleted]
| [deleted]
| philiplu wrote:
| Nice - this means the May 1988 issue of CACM is freely available.
| That's notable because the cover article is Cliff Stoll's
| "Stalking the Wily Hacker" [1], with the material that later
| became his book "The Cuckoo's Egg". But I've still got the dead-
| tree version of that issue around somewhere in storage because of
| another article, by Andrew Appel and Guy Jacobson, "The World's
| Fastest Scrabble Algorithm" [2]. I coded that up back then, in
| Pascal IIRC, and had a blast doing so.
|
| [1] https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.1145/42411.42412
|
| [2] https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.1145/42411.42420
| jdlyga wrote:
| I'm an ACM member. I just searched, and it still costs $5 to read
| recent articles. And that's with a membership. But good on them
| for opening access to older materials.
| khaledh wrote:
| I think your membership is just for the ACM itself, and doesn't
| include the Digital Library[0]. My membership includes the DL
| (for an extra $99/yr) and I have access to all recent articles.
|
| [0] https://www.acm.org/membership/membership-options
| haupt wrote:
| Do we have to register on the site to get download access? I
| found something from 1963 I'd like to download but there's no
| download link[0]. I'm sure I must be making a mistake. I found
| the article through the dl.acm.org search engine.
|
| [0] https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.1147/rd.24.0289
| qbit42 wrote:
| That's not published in an ACM venue, but that page has a link
| with the DOI, https://doi.org/10.1147/rd.24.0289, that takes
| you to the IEEE page with a download link.
| haupt wrote:
| I appreciate you including the DOI link in your comment. I
| like the fact that ACM has released some articles but as
| someone not entirely familiar with all the different ACM
| publications I am unsure as to how to sufficiently limit my
| search query to find downloadable articles. Perhaps they will
| add a specific "open access" filter to their search (I
| unsuccessfully tried searching "open access" but perhaps none
| of the articles are indexed by their availability). Thank you
| very much.
___________________________________________________________________
(page generated 2022-05-20 23:00 UTC)