2 ms·
Is it? They keep the scans (somewhere). These books would have rotted in bookstores and then been trashed once those bookstores went out of business. There’s n
by jimbob45 1mo ago
Is it? They keep the scans (somewhere). These books would have rotted in bookstores and then been trashed once those bookstores went out of business.
There’s no giant “used” section at Barnes and Noble. Libraries only have so much space and they have to cycle through books as the years go by. This is easily the best fate these books could have received.
- hexapus 1mo agoBullshit...they aren't sharing them with the internet archive, and at least the inventory of the defunct bookstore might have ended up with a collector or something. These slop factories have a less sound business model than any given bookstore, and you think they'll preserve those scans and share them with the world? Corporations regularly delete media for utterly capricious reasons.
- sandcat_ 1mo agoIndeed. In fact I suspect that the destruction is the point. A book that Anthropic destroys the last copy of is a book that OpenAI will never have.
- api 1mo agoIf they were sharing the scans it would be great but they’re not.
- bpodgursky 1mo agoThey are literally not legally allowed to do this. Google Books tried. They lost. If you want this fixed, talk to your congressman, not Amazon.
- api 1mo agoIs that really true or are a lot of these books out of copyright? And if they're not out of copyright why can they train on them without permission? They probably argue that training is fair use, but if I take a film and compress it with a novel data compression codec and distribute it I'm violating copyright. LLMs are lossy compression for textual information.
- tescreal 1mo agoThey're removing knowledge from the public domain. I don't mean copyright: I mean the very information published is being destroyed.