When Google scanned its books, it did not destroy any of the books. This was because of the idea of the "cultural object" where the book has value as a physical artifact. The experience of reading a physical book is different than reading an electronic text. There is an argument that reading a book in its original form is better because it is closer to the original experience. This can also be said of records and tapes. The experience is designed to work in the original format. A book is a designed object with cultural significance. The container for the words can be as important as the actual words. There should be clearer distinctions and policies between mass market production where items can be destroyed and there will still be many of them left and unique and original content with limited copies available. This is not hard to do. Not to do it shows carelessness.
The Vanishing Page: AI Firms Scan Then Destroy Rare Book Editions
51–60 of 79 posts
Re: The Vanishing Page: AI Firms Scan Then Destroy Rare Book Editions
#52Forever preserving the content of a rare book by consuming one (1) copy is the kind of thing we should always be doing more of. Roughly nobody would have had access to that copy. Roughly everyone can now benefit from its content.
Where can I read any of these destroyed copies from anthropic?
What do you imagine a rare book is? It's not the only extant copy of the writing in that book, in fact it's not even like it represents a significantly limited accessibility of that book.
Re: The Vanishing Page: AI Firms Scan Then Destroy Rare Book Editions
#53Why don't they just put the pdf versions on Internet Archives? Then they would at least be preserved for the future
Why don't they rebind them and put it back in some library? They don't have to throw it out.
Because legally then it's a copy and not a format conversion.
This story has a lot of details left out and is a magnet for illinformed commentators: the reason the originals are destroyed is because it is legal to do so for the purposes of format conversion, but not legal to retain the originals under copyright law.
Re: The Vanishing Page: AI Firms Scan Then Destroy Rare Book Editions
#54Humanity hasn't caught up to the reality of the times; we should adjust copyright laws so anything over say 10 years old can be hosted for free on the Internet. We should have colossal databases of music, books, movies, etc. that can be freely traded and downloaded without breaking any laws. Maybe in the past the commerical protection of art and IP was necessary but with the Internet and AI I think we need to, as a s…
I imagine you're in favor of the artists being compensated in some other way then? Or should they just suck it up?
I think it’s pretty clear in GP’s first sentence that they believe artists should get compensation during the first 10 years. I personally would change it to something more like 20 years but I share the idea.
Re: The Vanishing Page: AI Firms Scan Then Destroy Rare Book Editions
#55Earlier quoted context omitted.
It's possible to be opposed to excessive copyright and also be opposed to the mass theft of media for profit and subsequent abuse of copyright that the scrapers are guilty of. The AI pillagers are taking everything in, then gatekeeping access. And as they acknowledge with their "nothing after 2022" preferences, they (or their users at least) are salting the earth for future seekers of knowledge.
> It's possible to be opposed to excessive copyright Define excessive. Who makes that determination and how?
the people who are opposed to it
Re: The Vanishing Page: AI Firms Scan Then Destroy Rare Book Editions
#56Humanity hasn't caught up to the reality of the times; we should adjust copyright laws so anything over say 10 years old can be hosted for free on the Internet. We should have colossal databases of music, books, movies, etc. that can be freely traded and downloaded without breaking any laws. Maybe in the past the commerical protection of art and IP was necessary but with the Internet and AI I think we need to, as a s…
I imagine you're in favor of the artists being compensated in some other way then? Or should they just suck it up?
I think part of the problem is that current copyright law doesn't compensate artists, only mega corporations who figured out the right bureaucratic tricks (copyright assignment) to get paid in lieu of the artists.
Re: The Vanishing Page: AI Firms Scan Then Destroy Rare Book Editions
#57On the surface it seems bad, although many of these books were probably rotting in place rather than being read. If the companies are willing to make the digital version available this may actually prreserve the books. More troubling to me is the focus on pre-2022 data. This indicates that the companies are seriously worried about model collapse, where the future models become worse becuase they are being fed by gene…
What would happen if we created large volumes of books with AI but faked their dates before 2022 to induce model collapse?
Re: The Vanishing Page: AI Firms Scan Then Destroy Rare Book Editions
#58Earlier quoted context omitted.
It absolutely is. By destroying the original they retain the one copy they were licensed. It explicitly discusses that this was judged fair use in a court of law, because of the destruction of the original, as this becomes a transformation of the original work rather than a duplication. Don’t hate the player, hate the game.
So what are they doing about the online data they ingested?
Copying it. Because they clearly believe that they’re allowed to do so.
For physical books, they believe they’re not allowed to, hence the destruction.
It’s abhorrent, I agree… maybe if your world domination plan involves destroying rare books, you should change the plan rather than saying “well our hands our tied, the law says we have to”
Re: The Vanishing Page: AI Firms Scan Then Destroy Rare Book Editions
#59On the surface it seems bad, although many of these books were probably rotting in place rather than being read. If the companies are willing to make the digital version available this may actually prreserve the books. More troubling to me is the focus on pre-2022 data. This indicates that the companies are seriously worried about model collapse, where the future models become worse becuase they are being fed by gene…
Entropy is a thing. Ancient Rome stopped creating aqueducts because they had all the ones they needed. They failed to pass that knowledge on to the next generation and so they just forgot how to create aqueducts. Once AI starts making the majority of content, people will simply forget how to make content. Before we know it we're all fat slobs in floating chairs like in Wall-E. Best case scenario I think is similar to…
That's the western world right now with manufacturing. Meanwhile China did the manufacturing and India is coming up, so it's not a lost skill globally.
The next generations are also losing computer skills, being brought up with devices that handhold you and have no opportunity for customisation and are essentially thin clients for mega corporations.