• ExFed@programming.dev
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    7 days ago

    This is probably going to be an unpopular comment… but these articles are all super misleading. The physical books are getting destroyed, but their content is getting digitized. Is that a loss? Absolutely. But is there a benefit? Also yes.

    The biggest loss is probably the fact that destroying the physical books removes them from circulation, making them essentially permanent additions to these companies’ book collections.

    • Bob Robertson IX @discuss.tchncs.de
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      7 days ago

      The biggest loss is probably the fact that destroying the physical books removes them from circulation

      And these are books that have been sitting in warehouses that haven’t been able to be sold because no one wanted them. They were removed from circulation long ago.

      • Senal@programming.dev
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        6 days ago

        They aren’t in current circulation, not the same thing.

        Not arguing that they are useful, just that sitting in a warehouse and physical destruction aren’t equivalent in terms of potential use.

        • Bob Robertson IX @discuss.tchncs.de
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          6 days ago

          That’s true, but sitting in a warehouse is costing someone money and I’m sure they were more than happy to sell the books even if they knew they’d eventually get destroyed.

          But the other thing is, what should these companies do instead? They scraped the internet and got skewered for that. They pirated books and got in trouble for that. Now they are legally purchasing books to scan. They can’t donate or sell the books since they’ve effectively copied the book and that would get them into piracy trouble again.

          • Senal@programming.dev
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            6 days ago

            That’s true, but sitting in a warehouse is costing someone money and I’m sure they were more than happy to sell the books even if they knew they’d eventually get destroyed.

            Sure, thats a possibility, I wasnt arguing otherwise.

            But the other thing is, what should these companies do instead? They scraped the internet and got skewered for that. They pirated books and got in trouble for that. Now they are legally purchasing books to scan.

            For me, them doing sketchy and illegal shit, mostly getting away with it and then charging you for access to said ill-gotten gains is a valid reason for people to be upset at them, rage inducing, even.

            That aside the equivalent of mass book burning isn’t a good look regardless of legality, even less so when its the same people that did the sketchy shit before.

            There is no benefit of the doubt left.

            I can see how someone could get to:

            “all they do is sketchy shit so even though this might look legit, let’s vocally show our disdain for them and anything they are doing”

    • scintilla@crust.piefed.social
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      7 days ago

      What is the benifit of a book being digitized for only be used for one company training their “AI”. These digitized copies aren’t going to be made available to humans in any way because then the company would loose the advantage they have in training data.