this post was submitted on 21 Aug 2026
237 points (98.4% liked)

Technology

87417 readers
3849 users here now

This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.


Our Rules


  1. Follow the lemmy.world rules.
  2. Only tech related news or articles.
  3. Be excellent to each other!
  4. Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
  5. Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
  6. Politics threads may be removed.
  7. No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
  8. Only approved bots from the list below, this includes using AI responses and summaries. To ask if your bot can be added please contact a mod.
  9. Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed
  10. Accounts 7 days and younger will have their posts automatically removed.

Approved Bots


founded 3 years ago
MODERATORS
top 21 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] Zephyr@sh.itjust.works 2 points 12 hours ago* (last edited 10 minutes ago)

What if they turn around and encode all this data in crystals with advanced laser engraving aka making the information much more resilient to time and degradation? That said the sun will eventually run out of fuel and become a red giant and vaporize the Earth so putting a copy on a few other astrological bodies would be cool for the long haul.

[–] WesternInfidels@feddit.online 8 points 18 hours ago* (last edited 18 hours ago) (1 children)

You know what's even cheaper than destrucive scanning of old books?

Scaring a bunch of volunteers into scanning them for free.

I'm not saying that was the plan all along. But it might have been. It's plausible, with these jerks, isn't it?

[–] Gaslov@lemmy.world 0 points 15 hours ago

You do have to wonder who paid to get this content in front of everyone. How did anyone even know?

[–] fluffykittycat@slrpnk.net 32 points 1 day ago

I love Anna's archive

[–] Soulphite@reddthat.com 13 points 1 day ago

All part of the plan for these assholes to change history in their favor and teach AI to regurgitate their bullshit propaganda to the naive new generation. We are living literal 1984.

[–] tal@lemmy.today 7 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago) (2 children)

The destruction of the book is done to mitigate some copyright concerns. There will be a fairly small number of large-scale projects like this, and each only needs one copy of a given book, so outside of maybe very rare books, the impact is going to be pretty negligible on availability


like someone buying one copy of that book.

[–] bless@lemmy.ml 18 points 1 day ago

Weird how when I buy a book, the "license" for the content is tied to the physical object, but when a company destroys the book and OCRs it, it's perfectly ok

[–] WesternInfidels@feddit.online 1 points 18 hours ago (1 children)

The destruction of the book is done to mitigate some copyright concerns.

Can you explain? The First Sale doctrine means its OK to sell books after you're done with them. I would think it would be the scanning itself that could be a copyright problem, not the disposition of the physical book after.

I thought the real reason, the main reason, was, as the article says, "Destroying books is cheaper."

I agree that the concern over the destruction of physical books, and what impact that will have on their availability, is probably exaggerated. Heck, the actual importance of old books to the AI companies may be exaggerated, that seems to be their hype style.

[–] pticrix@lemmy.ca 4 points 17 hours ago (1 children)

404 media reported this recently. Excerpt from the article :

It’s possible to scan books without destroying them, but cutting the spine makes it cheaper and faster. Additionally, the judge in the lawsuit ruled it was fair use and not a copyright violation for Anthropic to scan a book for training data in part because it destroyed the original, printed copy. Essentially, it’s the customer’s right to take physical media and store it digitally, and destroying the original copy means that copy isn’t duplicated and resold, and isn’t cutting into the publisher’s business.

[–] bedwyr@piefed.ca 1 points 14 hours ago

Then they plagarize that data though, using it without attribution or payment, which is aganst copyright law. If a person did this they would be stopped. Because it's big money, the law doesn't apply.

[–] patruelis@lemmy.world 6 points 1 day ago (2 children)
[–] adespoton@lemmy.ca 13 points 1 day ago (1 children)
[–] MalReynolds@slrpnk.net 5 points 1 day ago (1 children)

Damn that's a lot of waiting. There was another device that just MRI'd books where they were, but no, 'AI' companies need to rip books apart to scan them. FU.

[–] BrianTheeBiscuiteer@lemmy.world 4 points 20 hours ago (2 children)

No less frustrating but I believe destruction is a required part of the process so the AI companies can say they still only have one "copy" of the book.

[–] ReptilianCleric@lemmy.zip 6 points 19 hours ago* (last edited 19 hours ago)

Oh like they care.

No, it's far more crass: destroying the book makes scanning easier and faster.

[–] MalReynolds@slrpnk.net 3 points 19 hours ago

Yah, exclusive content, or just rats watching the ship go down while burning books. FU AI bros playing the largest scam in history...

[–] fluffykittycat@slrpnk.net 2 points 1 day ago

They have cradles that hold them so a camera can photograph them. You then save the book afterwards