I think one of the major things you learn as you get older is that there is a huge abundance of people who say the right thing, and a much smaller group of people who do the right thing.

The internet made this even worse by celebrating people who only have to say the right thing.

    > The example book of Old books of agriculture is probably not that important today

We're about to enter an era of climate instability that's going to cause wild fluctuations in the ability to grow food across the globe. Historical agriculture data AND data about confounds is crucial for figuring out what strains outside of our current mostly mono-strain agricultural supply chain could be cultivated.

And that's just one use case out of thousands; what if you want to understand and reconstruct technology adoption from that era?

What if... you just want to learn what your ancestor was doing at such and such time?

What if you want to find clever techniques for robot arms to work with food crops in space?

Or, heck just the alpha from a hedge fund point of view of finding old climate patterns and... :)

Your ability to make the most of knowledge is only limited by your imagination.

    > Liberians have to accept that much of their job is sending books to be burned. A lot of them try their best to get people to be interested in older books, but they have to make way for "newer" books instead.

    > The article is written in the same way as how dogs are getting murdered in the dog shelter, even if "everyone" agrees it is wrong, yet nobody adopts them.

re: saving books, at a personal level, I try to use the excuse of work to find, read, and do stuff with old books,

https://1517.substack.com/p/powder-and-stone-or-why-medieval

And yes, people still care. And people who care do things.

Well if you're appealing to librarians:

"Hey, guys, when the librarians get pissed about the destruction of books, it’s time to put those listening ears on.

Because we are very comfortable with the idea that books are tools that can be retired. What’s happening right now is not that...."

https://bsky.app/profile/annabookwriter.bsky.social/post/3mt...

Also, why are people acting like Anthropic digitizing and destroying a rare book is what makes it inaccessible to the public?

If they were simply buying the books and doing nothing with them, the public wouldn’t be able to access their copies anyway.

They should be happy to have a job at all in the Republic of Liberia.

A quick search suggests that most "weeded" books are sold on or donated rather than burnt or sent to landfill. Do you have sources that say otherwise?

No, they are destroying them because that’s the way that they can keep a digital copy legally.

You don't know that. A major part of the problem here is the lack of transparency.

Keep in mind we wouldn't even know this was happening were it not for investigative journalism.

They are destroying them because it’s easier to scan them if you slice the binding.

Are you under the impression they scan the book, train on it, then destroy the digital copy? Because that's not what's happening. They scan it, and hold it forever to train future models on. The scan still exists, not available to the general public but that's no different than if they had bought the books and kept them in a private library closed to the public.

They're scans. Those are human-readable. They probably won't make them available to the public, which is the exact same state they would be in if they bought the books and just put them on a bookshelf in a warehouse.

A lot of them are rotting. We are not talking "one of the three living copies of the first edition of Joyce's Ulysses". Rather "1956 statistics of the cultive of yuca in 'some small village from Mexico': a boring analysis". Those books have value to train LLMs as they are 100% free of AI text, but has been collecting dust (or rotting) in someone's room for decades, and no human is buying them even for 10 cents.

Also, Anna's text implies that the books are scanned and then mischievously destroyed so nobody has access again to the content. That's not the case: the books are "destroyed" before scanning, by dissasembling them in pages so they can be feed to the scanner. Scanning while keeping the book intact is difficult, as you need to software-unwarp the page before OCR'ing it, and expensive as you either need specialized scanners or humans doing it.

No, they are not. A lot of them are rotting and get thrown or given at the end of the day.

That doesn't sound ridiculous at all (maybe reductive but not ridiculous). And the US doing the same doesn't make it any less interesting either. In fact the US's use of AI in developing target banks in a recent conflict caused quite a lot of consternation when publicly revealed. Ukraine has also recently used AI enabled autonomous drones to make an entire area one big "kill zone", no humans required. Not so ridiculous or boring if you ask me.

No. Almost none of the books you donate to the library get to the shelves. If they can sell it, they will. Otherwise they are thrown away.

I even read on a web site of a librarian that their library had stopped accepting donations because "patrons should know how to throw away their own trash".

As for books that haven't fallen apart from being used as intended and merely are no longer desired, my local library generally sells them off at bargain prices.

What happens when the books don't sell?

> When they're damaged beyond hope of repair from decades of wear. As for books that haven't fallen apart from being used as intended and merely are no longer desired, my local library generally sells them off at bargain prices. Of course I can't speak to your local library.

Many books aren't lent and not bought and most libraries have limited space to store such books, thus they go where old paper goes.

Of course some rarely lent books are important and for the one person asking for it in ten years really valuable, but many still have to go.

As someone who has gone to many many used book sales over decades… many of the books at a sale never get sold, guess what they usually get tossed in the dump. This includes your local library book sales. Books are heavy and worthless. Cheaper to throw away the ones that nobody picks up in a sale.

I know it comes at a shock but truly most books are absolutely worthless.

The average lifespan of a library book is 26 loans. For a popular book that could be less than a year.

> Now I’m certain they’re not chopping up Davincis notebooks, but I’m not certain there aren’t some that would make people wince.

Then they should list the names of these books otherwise I say they're alarmist.

I heard from the first stories that virtually all of these books being ordered have ISBN numbers. Books that are rare that have ISBN numbers are rare because no one wanted them 99.9% of the time. Somebody wants every book, but you'd spend many, many years finding that somebody.

Any original text has value for the purpose of AI training. The argument is that they have no other value.

A flagship LLM today is trained on tens of trillions of tokens, the equivalent of hundreds of millions of 100k word books. No human has that kind of appetite.

As an aside, the entire Google Books corpus is generally estimated at tens of millions of books.

You don't need a massive government program for this.

Just post on r/DataHoarder: "Free 16TB NVMe SSD to anyone who indexes and mirrors the entire out-of-print 20th-century physical archive." The problem would be solved by next Tuesday. With probably 10x redundancy and people willing to do it for free for fun.

> Puts the burden on government to store what is probably 90% worthless material.

That's what governments are for.

This is already required for new books published in the US, and has been for more than one hundred years.

It’s called “mandatory deposit”

Actually - most jurisdictions that issue a publisher a unique root ISBN number have a stipulation that anything new published using that number must have a copy sent to them.

Looked into this a decade ago for publishing eBooks via my personal corp when eReaders and ePub were starting to hit big in the mainstream.

https://www.google.com/search?q=how+many+books+are+published... https://www.google.com/search?q=how+many+megabytes+average+b... https://www.google.com/search?q=what+is+3+megabytes+times+2....

That's already the case, though the "digital rather than physical" as a preference could be something that legislation would improve.

https://www.copyright.gov/mandatory/

> All works under copyright protection that are published in the United States are subject to the mandatory deposit provision of the Copyright Act (section 407 of Title 17).

> This law requires two copies of each work published in the United States be deposited with the Copyright Office within three months of publication. Works deposited under this law are for the use of the Library of Congress. Usually, deposited copies must be the “best edition” of the work, which means they must conform to the Library of Congress’s preferred specifications.

----

> Acceptable Formats for Deposit of Electronic Works

> The deposit of electronic works is arranged with the Acquisitions & Deposits division.

> For electronic-only works, submit the best edition in accordance with the formats listed in the “Electronic-Only Works Published in the United States and Available Only Online” section of the Best Edition Statement (PDF, 135 KB).

> For works subject to a grant of special relief, unless otherwise specified, the Library will accept an appropriate “preferred” format listed on the Library of Congress Recommended Formats Statement. Such files must contain no measures (such as digital rights management [DRM] technologies or encryption) that control access to or prevent use of the digital work.

> For more information about electronic deposit, see the above FAQ “When can I make an electronic deposit of a work?”

---

> When can I make an electronic deposit of a work?

> Works may be deposited in a physical format in accordance with the Best Edition Statement, which can be found in Best Edition of Published Copyrighted Works for the Collections of the Library of Congress (Circular 7B) (PDF, 135 KB).

> Works may be deposited electronically in certain circumstances:

> The Copyright Office issues a written demand for an electronic-only book or serial. If your work is published only online and the Office sends you a written demand for mandatory deposit of the work, you must deposit the work electronically.

> The Copyright Office offers you electronic deposit as an alternative to depositing a physical copy of the work. If you receive a letter offering special relief to deposit a work in an electronic format instead of sending physical copies, follow the instructions in the letter or agreement.

---

https://www.loc.gov/preservation/resources/rfs/

https://www.loc.gov/preservation/resources/rfs/text.html

If the Library of Congress has a digital copy, it would be easier for them to distribute the work after the copyright of the work expires. That would be a public benefit.

If they're 50 years old they're young, and archive.org will likely block access. If they're not already on annas-archive (or the copy there is trash), your best bet is an anon upload to libgen.

Copyright infringement has a long and deep bank of caselaw but as Anthropic has already discovered, it is not entirely "settled."

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.

It will probably be actioned off in the bankruptcy proceedings.

It's already been distilled.

no matter how you look at it, this is a systemic failure. if as a society we're going to mass scan our history then we should be building an archive for the future. not using availability of information as a moat. not doing it over and over again and throwing it away because of some odd rules to protect someones market position. not using it as an excuse to put paywalls around 80 year old field guides to field rodents in western massachusetts. not taking texts that had limited value and mining them for turns of phrase to be piled up into a useless grey goo.

It's likely more along the "fool me twice" category of wisdom. The opposite would instead be a kind of naive thinking.

If you are suggesting that air conditioning, plumbing, democracy, and human rights are bad for society then I am missing the analogy.

Nobody will ask you, they'll be taken from you, in case you missed what happens around.

Depends on the point being made about “historical precedent” and the lessons to be drawn from such.

Also, helps to clarify what exactly the commenter was referring to and possibly help distinguish the centuries-spanning decline of the Library of Alexandria from the violent fate of the Serapeum.

I didn't claim it was orchestrated by them, it may or may not be, but it is evidently aligned with their interests.

Exactly the same as shutting down perfectly fine German nuclear plants was aligned with Russian interests.

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

It's possible for a datacenter to use scarce well water irresponsibly.

They don't have to, and the vast majority don't.

The lie and moral panic is that all datacenters necessarily waste precious drinking water; it's patently false and used by agitators to push, unwittingly or not, a Chinese Communist Party agenda.

That AI consumes it at an abnormally high rate, presumably.

The claim never made sense to me either, I can only assume those that regurgitated such claims never worked with HPC or even general datacenters before.

Was recently talking to a (non-technical) friend about this, she was surprised after talking about the "insane water use for AI datacenters" when I responded that open-loop cooling is pretty rare for a datacenter and I've never actually seen it used before, versus closed-loop (or just regular air-based cooling) which has no real noticable water consumption.

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.

That AI data centers are drinking up local ground water for cooling. It isn't (or wasn't) nonsense, though. It was/is a real thing, though it seems to be on the out in favor of closed loop cooling after the massive and still on-going public outcry.

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

nuclear was killed by russian nat gas money.

running nuclear plants were shut down while running just fine

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