@lagrangeinterpolator@awful.systems
Post #4224902
2026-07-30 03:31 UTC
Replies (2)
-
@YourNetworkIsHaunted@awful.systems 2026-07-30 06:22
What kills me is that there are so many obvious ways to be less wasteful about this. Nondestructive book scanners exist. They’re expensive but it’s not like AI companies are averse to throwing money down a fucking hole. Even if that’s not an option, it’s possible to rebind the pages and return the books to the market. And regardless of what happens to the physical books, the scans they create could be archived in a format that could be available as a digital library rather than just being fed into the statistical meat grinder to keep the trough topped off with slop. Even if they’ve got to fight with copyright holders it would cost them basically nothing to leave the option open and given the PR battle they’ve been losing it feels like doing so would be incredibly obvious. Hell, even Google Books was able to navigate this in a way that was less cartoonishly evil than this because they could point to their digitization effort as a public good in ways that Anthropic here just fucking can’t.
-
@lurker@awful.systems 2026-07-30 19:01
Fuck Anthropic. Snotty little bastards want to talk about AI safety and then destroy books to make a pollution machine.