2026-07-26 20:53 UTC
Replies (5)
-
@moonlight@indulgent.art 2026-07-27 03:51
@LilahTovMoon@tech.lgbt That's so grim…
-
@LilahTovMoon@tech.lgbt 2026-07-26 20:55
Imagine telling your investors, "we have a durable advantage because we purchased lots of one-of-a-kind books for our AI training and then destroyed them so none of our competitors could use them as sources" 🤬
-
@bjoerni@tech.lgbt 2026-07-26 21:34
@LilahTovMoon@tech.lgbt I read an article about used bookstores in my city. They were surprised by the huge orders, which always came at night and from abroad. It's sad to think that all of this will be destroyed 😒
-
@SnarkWasABoojum@tech.lgbt 2026-07-26 21:58
@LilahTovMoon@tech.lgbt WTAF. “Print books from the pre-LLM era are structurally guaranteed to be free of this contamination. That alone is a significant advantage,” it explains in an article on its website, as quoted by 404. “Physical books published before this date [pre-2022] are structurally clean of modern poisoning tools.” Weirdly it makes me think of steel. Modern steel is contaminated with nuclear fallout, so for sensitive applications, pre-1940 steel is particularly valuable. So naturally the AI company response to this is to destroy the books.
-
@bherrmann7@mastodon.social 2026-07-26 23:43
@LilahTovMoon@tech.lgbt they likely saw the spine and scan the pages thousands per second. So destroying the book is not the intention, but economic