41–50 of 961 posts
I dislike these AI companies but let's be clear here: the copyright holders are the ones locking these books up. If they don't want to print more copies, then they could release the copyright on them. Instead, they enforce the copyright and force AI companies to shred books they want to ingest. edit: Also, an AI company would only ever care to purchase, scan, destroy a book once. Presumably many books have more than…
The piracy organizations are playing 4D chess while everyone else is playing checkers. The irony of this entire situation - AI companies being legally required to shred books due to kafkaesque copyright laws, then used as a marketing tactic by Anna's Archive - is a work of art. I support Anna's Archive, by the way. Information wants to be free.
I dislike these AI companies but let's be clear here: the copyright holders are the ones locking these books up. If they don't want to print more copies, then they could release the copyright on them. Instead, they enforce the copyright and force AI companies to shred books they want to ingest. edit: Also, an AI company would only ever care to purchase, scan, destroy a book once. Presumably many books have more than…
The articles I've read on this are not clear, but I strongly suspect "rare" is not the definition you and I probably use for the level of rarity of books actually being destroyed. These are not going to be the kinds of books "The Ninth Gate" resolved around - truly one of a kind. It's not good they are destroying books, but they are books which do have other copies. Just perhaps not many.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
They are "forced" to do this because that's what they have to do to abide by copyright law. They can't create a digital duplicate without destroying the original.
Since when do AI companies care about copyright law? They're destroying them so their competitors can't use them.
That's pretty silly. My competitor can't ride my bike either, and I didn't have to destroy the bike for that to be true.
I dislike these AI companies but let's be clear here: the copyright holders are the ones locking these books up. If they don't want to print more copies, then they could release the copyright on them. Instead, they enforce the copyright and force AI companies to shred books they want to ingest. edit: Also, an AI company would only ever care to purchase, scan, destroy a book once. Presumably many books have more than…
that's ironic, the url annas-archive.gl is blocked by my local DNS category for AI Threat Detection.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
They are "forced" to do this because that's what they have to do to abide by copyright law. They can't create a digital duplicate without destroying the original.
Since when do AI companies care about copyright law? They're destroying them so their competitors can't use them.
This is just one example, but it has become unfortunately common across all social media platforms.
The very first paragraph is fascinating: "Several AI companies are acquiring large quantities of secondhand books through intermediaries, scanning and destroying them, all to obtain training data “untouched by machines” from before 2022." Is the corpus of human knowledge useful for high quality AI training now essentially frozen in time? Also, how useful old books really are for AI training besides helping AI acquire…
No. They also use lots of other methods to get training data.
Someone should build the digital equivalent of a fire department. Train a model on the books, then if the originals get destroyed you still have the smoke.