AI companies destroy physical books – let's scan rare books before it's too late • Hacker News Board

Re: AI companies destroy physical books – let's scan rare books before it's too late

#451

Post by brookst » Fri, Aug 21, 2026, 1:31 PM UTC

TofuLover wrote: post #437

himinlomax wrote: post #426

Earlier quoted context omitted.

They're not destroying rare manuscripts or incunables. They're destroying one (1) copy of a mass-produced item for each AI company. Public libraries destroy millions more yearly as a matter of routine. This is just part of a CCP-aligned moral panic, along with the water use nonsense, and similar with the soviet-aligned moral panic that destroyed the civil nuclear industry 40 years ago.

> This is just part of a CCP-aligned moral panic, along with the water use nonsense What was nonsense about water use?

It was never that dramatic, and it’s declining day by day. It’s a panic over a real but small problem.

Order of magnitude more water is lost from wasted irrigation (e.g. during rain, of fallow fields, sprayed into windy air, etc) than data centers.

Re: AI companies destroy physical books – let's scan rare books before it's too late

#452

Post by alex43578 » Fri, Aug 21, 2026, 1:31 PM UTC

TofuLover wrote: post #437

himinlomax wrote: post #426

Earlier quoted context omitted.

They're not destroying rare manuscripts or incunables. They're destroying one (1) copy of a mass-produced item for each AI company. Public libraries destroy millions more yearly as a matter of routine. This is just part of a CCP-aligned moral panic, along with the water use nonsense, and similar with the soviet-aligned moral panic that destroyed the civil nuclear industry 40 years ago.

> This is just part of a CCP-aligned moral panic, along with the water use nonsense What was nonsense about water use?

The outcry over data centers using a fraction of the water used for things like golf courses or growing alfalfa in a desert.

Re: AI companies destroy physical books – let's scan rare books before it's too late

#453

Post by logseman » Fri, Aug 21, 2026, 1:32 PM UTC

bmelton wrote: post #434

thesdev wrote: post #403

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> working towards the benefit of humanity is not an exclusive right / domain of theirs That's not their goal or else they wouldn't be burning books. Their goal is making money no matter the cost to the society.

If they were just chopping them up without scanning them first, then sure, but I think that scanning books and burning books are polar opposites

Burning books and destroying them in a way that nobody else can access the content anymore is a distinction without a difference.

Re: AI companies destroy physical books – let's scan rare books before it's too late

#454

Post by brookst » Fri, Aug 21, 2026, 1:32 PM UTC

raptor99 wrote: post #346

ziyadb wrote: post #299

I was surprised to read that Anthropic (and probably other data / model companies) are doing this and it's extremely disappointing, as working towards the benefit of humanity is not an exclusive right / domain of theirs but rather, is a shared responsibility and mission carried by all of humanity itself as a collective responsibility. Thus, the preservation of this knowledge, its availability, and accessibility are t…

I hate to be the bearer of bad news but you really do have to assume the worst about any of these "AI" companies, especially the large ones like ChatGPT and Anthropic. They literally lie, cheat and steal at any opportunity they have and in any way that they think of. Do not trust a single thing that they say; it is a fool's folly to do so. A lot of this can already be said about a lot of companies, especially almost…

Are you really advocating for assuming things with no evidence, by presenting no evidence for why one should do so? That’s not especially rigorous thinking.

Re: AI companies destroy physical books – let's scan rare books before it's too late

#455

Post by embedding-shape » Fri, Aug 21, 2026, 1:33 PM UTC

brainwad wrote: post #305

embedding-shape wrote: post #298

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> because copyright law forces them to do stupid things This is such dangerous train of thought, to give them the benefit of being forced to destroy books. Why is that exactly, and who is forcing them? You can also, you know, find another way? Like the data centers who currently use very dirty energy acquisition methods (not all of them), are they also "forced" to do this, because they too need to make as much money…

It is a shit idea. But that's copyright law for you - if you want to digitise the work for yourself, you according to latest precedents have to destroy the copy you digitised ¯ \ _ ( ツ ) _ / ¯ I don't blame the companies for either wanting digitised works, nor following the law. I blame the absurd court ruling, and I blame the publishers for not having digitised the old works themselves, in which case they could just…

But why do they have to do this at all? If it's a shit idea, and you cannot do something without negative side-effects of it, can't you just not do it? Why these companies absolutely have to do this?

Re: AI companies destroy physical books – let's scan rare books before it's too late

#456

Post by SXX » Fri, Aug 21, 2026, 1:33 PM UTC

fc417fc802 wrote: post #446

himinlomax wrote: post #426

Earlier quoted context omitted.

They're not destroying rare manuscripts or incunables. They're destroying one (1) copy of a mass-produced item for each AI company. Public libraries destroy millions more yearly as a matter of routine. This is just part of a CCP-aligned moral panic, along with the water use nonsense, and similar with the soviet-aligned moral panic that destroyed the civil nuclear industry 40 years ago.

I was with you until the water use. You're misinformed. There were at one point at least several data centers set to use evaporative cooling on well water. Notably since all the controversy many data centers are very loud about being closed loop and with significant consideration given to other local impacts as well.

Yep. I was personally misinformed the same way at some point. Never expected evaporative cooling to be so popular, but it is.

Re: AI companies destroy physical books – let's scan rare books before it's too late

#457

Post by brookst » Fri, Aug 21, 2026, 1:33 PM UTC

alerighi wrote: post #321

ziyadb wrote: post #299

I was surprised to read that Anthropic (and probably other data / model companies) are doing this and it's extremely disappointing, as working towards the benefit of humanity is not an exclusive right / domain of theirs but rather, is a shared responsibility and mission carried by all of humanity itself as a collective responsibility. Thus, the preservation of this knowledge, its availability, and accessibility are t…

Yes but let's continue using Claude to write code because we suck at programming. Really the only way out of this is to STOP NOW using AI and use our brain instead. These company will just shut down if we stop using, and thus paying, for their services. Come on, we did without AI for all our history, we could live without it with no issue (as to me we could live without smartphones, internet, etc if we want).

The age-old cry of the aging population, faced with tech that didn’t exist when they were young. Turn back time!

I’m reminded of the screeds about the dangers of novels.

Re: AI companies destroy physical books – let's scan rare books before it's too late

#458

Post by [deleted] » Fri, Aug 21, 2026, 1:34 PM UTC

brookst wrote: post #447

jdiff wrote: post #352

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Nowhere in this description did it require destruction of the physical book. This is being done because it's easier to scan a shucked book, and this explanation is circulating because it's easier to blame it on the law and that pesky meddling government.

Citation please? Bartz v Anthropic seems pretty clear, see also Authors Guild v Google and RIAA v Diamond Multimedia.

[deleted]

Re: AI companies destroy physical books – let's scan rare books before it's too late

#459

Post by cormorant » Fri, Aug 21, 2026, 1:34 PM UTC

Goronmon wrote: post #433

ainiriand wrote: post #347

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That's what state libraries are for, although I understand that sometimes is hard to wrap around the concept of using public money for something different than producing money.

Libraries tend to regularly destroy books as well. And they aren't scanning them first either. Doesn't that make them even worse?

"State libraries" such as the Library of Congress. (Which is not regularly destroying books, AFAIK.)

Re: AI companies destroy physical books – let's scan rare books before it's too late

#460

Post by joshstrange » Fri, Aug 21, 2026, 1:34 PM UTC

squidbeak wrote: post #417

joshstrange wrote: post #336

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It would be if it made the point you think it is. All of this is more and more hand waving. 75 copies in museums? Then I think we’re good. As for the 18th century books, that’s pure speculation. It’s like a museum saying, “yes we have they prints for sale that they keep buying and destroying but wouldn’t it be a shame if someone destroyed the actual Mona Lisa?”. And lastly, if these books are so important, then don’t…

> It would be if it made the point you think it is. All of this is more and more hand waving. 75 copies in museums? Then I think we’re good. You're repeating the seller's contextual point, as if it's a counterargument. Do I need to explain to you that what makes the lone surviving 18th century edition important is that there aren't 75 copies of it in museums? > And lastly, if these books are so important, then don’t…

You are conflating 2 parts of the article to make it say something it's not. No one has put forward any examples of a "lone surviving 18th century edition" being bought up my AI companies and destroyed. That was just an example of "wouldn't it be terrible if", not a "this has actually happened". It's a complete hypothetical, it's a made up scenario, it's a boogeyman. You've hung your entire 2 comments on something that has no evidence of happening.

> It's good to see you agree any digitization of this category of book should be non-destructive.

I don't. Digital or physical, it's the same, there is no difference in my mind. I have many paper books but they are art, not functional, I also have the ebooks which is what I actually read. The _ideas_ are what's important, not a dusty, decaying shell in which the ideas are contained. I wouldn't shed a tear over every library digitizing their books and destroying the physical versions, nothing is lost. More importantly, once you've bought something it's yours, yours to read, yours to display, yours to destroy. On hacker news, of all places, the people fighting _against_ first sale doctrine is appalling.

> Why has no-one cared to actually preserve the actually preserved book being sold by the bookseller... Bit of a strange question, that.

Our definitions probably differ here but preserving is not storing a book, preserving is ensuring that even if this copy is destroyed the ideas inside live on. I think that people that hoard (actually) rare books without a thought or care to making sure the text inside is preserved for future generations out of some desire to simply own something rare are the actually monsters here. And let's dispose with the notion that booksellers are "preserving" books, they are holding inventory, inventory they were happy to sell to Amazon/etc. If AI companies were raiding museums at gunpoint we'd be having a different discussion. They are buying books for sale, if they keep them in a library at corporate or scan and destroy them it makes no difference.