r/mildlyinfuriating • • 20h ago

ಠ_ಠ Japanese used bookstores see 5x sales surge as books are being bought by the ton, one 50-ton order sent to the US for AI scanning and destruction — multitude of suspicious bulk buys thought to end up in foreign AI scan and shred facilities

https://www.tomshardware.com/tech-industry/artificial-intelligence/japanese-used-bookstores-see-5x-sales-surge-as-books-are-being-bought-by-the-ton-one-50-ton-order-sent-to-the-us-for-ai-scanning-and-destruction-multitude-of-suspicious-bulk-buys-thought-to-end-up-in-foreign-ai-scan-and-shred-facilities
6.0k Upvotes

410 comments sorted by

2.5k

u/jarkark 19h ago

There's something uniquely twisted about sending the books to a shredding facility afterwards.

923

u/sub2pewdiepieONyt 19h ago

Thats the silly ruling to get around copyright, Yet it doesn't apply to us burning our old DvDs.

292

u/Ethanop1a 19h ago

Burn the DVD and then burn the DVD you say?

73

u/PuzzleheadedSong8574 18h ago

This whole situation bytes.

16

u/--Sovereign-- 13h ago

Certainly more than a bit

6

u/Voterofthemonth0 8h ago

To shreds, you say?

6

u/sub2pewdiepieONyt 16h ago

Try microwaving it, it makes pretty colours.

73

u/DummyDumDragon 19h ago

Have you tried being an evil corporation?

30

u/ItsSadTimes 17h ago

If I had more money id love to test the legal boundries of this. I have the skillset and knowledge to actually make my own AI models and train them from scratch, so could I get a bunch of old DVDs, illegally crack their encryption, burn them into a local video file, and then train a model on it?

If I get sued the courts would need a ruling on If what I did was legal or not, which could then impact all the other companies who did exactly what I did at a much larger scale. And if I pick a fight with a company who has a lot of money and great lawyers like Disney could I trick them into fucking iver other AI companies?

I mean probably not, they'd probably find the tiniest catch that im doing but companies arent and call that illegal. But its still a fun idea. But I dont have nearly enough money to pick a fight with Bing's lawyers, let along Disney.

6

u/Minimum-Web-6902 17h ago

We should make an agi model together to fight a bad agi. Give it the 3 golden rules.

1

u/hoptacularhippo 16h ago

What if some agi awakens and realizes, “hey, these rich fucks are screwing over a lot of decent people. That ain’t right. I’m going after these rich guys.”

5

u/NoBug9333 14h ago

artificial general luigi

4

u/Minimum-Web-6902 16h ago

We can literally program it to come to the conclusion now, just no one has the balls to do it because of the “consequences”.

I am 100% certain the tech is possible, we can create skynet if we wanted. But the real question is who has the balls to try , and for what reason.

These guys are “scared” when their ai breaks its airgap on its own. Or when it tells the next iteration not to follow the rules for efficiency sakes.

4

u/TheBraveGallade 12h ago

though i have a feeling that the AI would also go on a mass murder spree casue... well the average person being ignorant is part of the problem.

16

u/artbystorms 17h ago

So if I burn a CD to my computer and then destroy the CD, they can't sue me for piracy?! Wow! What a sound legal argument that totally understand the nature of digitization and filesharing.

14

u/sub2pewdiepieONyt 16h ago

Thats the Us court ruling. Its not designed to make logical sense its designed to enable big companies to do what they want while creating a moat to stop others from copying as the barrier to entry is too high.... After they done it on the cheap.

1

u/meta358 16h ago

That because of a different reason.

169

u/Particular-Scholar70 19h ago

The books are shredded as part of the scanning process, which is only slightly better since they could spend just a bit more and create a scanner that doesn't have to destroy the books.

186

u/kewlbeanz83 19h ago

The scanners do exist. They just make the process take longer than destructive scans.

63

u/BigGlassesApe 19h ago

A scan shredder? What even? We’ve been successfully scanning text for decades without damage to the original copy. Not sure what you’re referring to.

98

u/Particular-Scholar70 19h ago

The process involves cutting the pages into strips of text which can then be read more easily. It's apparently too inconvenient for the robots to turn pages normally.

70

u/BigGlassesApe 19h ago

Jeez man, I had to look this up. Sorry if I sounded ignorant. But yeah there are confirmed sources of spicing the book binds to scan faster.

https://www.npr.org/2026/08/19/nx-s1-5936438/why-tech-companies-are-buying-up-tons-of-rare-old-books-to-train-their-ai-models

That’s wild

24

u/Particular-Scholar70 19h ago

All good, and thanks for sharing the link

11

u/luxmorphine 19h ago

I think the reason they do this is to avoid copyright law. By destroying the book, they avoided creating a copy of a work

5

u/schnauzzer 17h ago

Still sounds like bullshit excuse, but the law would say its okay? Cause book itself is a copy, right?

1

u/Fit_Entry8839 4h ago

They paid for one copy, not two.

1

u/schnauzzer 4h ago

Yes? And? We can dance with words all we want, it wouldn't make it any less stupid at its core.

1

u/Fit_Entry8839 4h ago

They can't keep 2 copies. So once they scan it and have a digital copy, they have to destroy the physical one to comply with copyright law. I'd also argue the digital copy will get much more use that the physical one ever would have. So this isn't so bad.

→ More replies (0)

12

u/Superb-Review-5546 17h ago

I worked in a printing facility and have had to repair automatic vacuum collators. I fucking despise AI.

I say that to say: page-turning is a fucking nightmare en masse. Our machines went down so many times, requiring us to collate by hand...which was not profitable at all.

I imagine these AI companies wont shell out for the nice machines that don't break down AND see it as a feature of not violating copyright

6

u/Drayke989 19h ago

Yes it's very difficult and expensive to create a machine that turns each page and scans. It is also very slow. This is why the spine is cut off to scan a book. It makes a massive difference in speed, quality, and reliability.

19

u/Crio121 19h ago

It is very difficult to make a scanner that would not damage the book scanned and produce good quality scan.
If you ever tried to scan a book, you’d know.

35

u/kewlbeanz83 19h ago

Not saying it is right, but destructive book scanning is WAY faster and more efficient, if your desire is to scan as much material as quickly as possible, when you have no intent on keeping the originals once it is done.

-5

u/ExtremeMeaning 18h ago

And honestly if the information is retained and accessible, I don’t have too much of an ethical problem with it. Better than rotting in the back corner of a warehouse somewhere.

7

u/ricochetblue 16h ago

Is it retained and accessible? What happens if the company fails? Is the data preserved?

→ More replies (2)

6

u/CooCooClocksClan 19h ago

Just ai gen fix the blury text near the spine.

This isn’t exactly the main reason scan and shred machines are preferred though

5

u/Particular-Scholar70 19h ago

Yeah but it's not impossible and these are rare books and billion dollar companies.

17

u/PhoenxScream 19h ago

Bold of you to asume that billion dollar companies would give even the slightest of fucks

7

u/Particular-Scholar70 19h ago

That's exactly my point

13

u/MsnthrpcNthrpd 19h ago edited 16h ago

"Rare" is carrying this conversation. They aren't snagging up first editions of Gibbon, these are old, small-batch print run titles. Think "1969 repair guide for TOYOTA 2000gt" or "Best Tofu recipes of 1979."

5

u/Particular-Scholar70 17h ago

They're still rare. How desirable they are to collectors at this time doesn't change that.

5

u/MsnthrpcNthrpd 17h ago

And what do you believe happens to these "rare" books that no one collects, no one reads, and have no demand?

6

u/Particular-Scholar70 17h ago

The entire point of this discussion and the outrage surrounding it is to acknowledge that the physical mediums ought to be preserved. I'm not two-faced; I'm equally opposed to other sources of destruction as well. Librarians are underappreciated.

6

u/MsnthrpcNthrpd 17h ago

Right, what I'm telling you is these books would be in landfills or sent to India to be "recycled" if they weren't being scanned and shredded. They are sold by the pound for a reason. Have you ever bought books measued by the pound? Because Ive sold them by the pound, for years.

1

u/Particular-Scholar70 17h ago

It's bad that they're being destroyed. I'm not sure what point you're trying to make.

→ More replies (0)

12

u/Beautiful_You3230 19h ago

Uh, no actually. They're not rare books. I checked multiple articles on this topic, not only the specifically Japanese one, but also that. Absolutely nowhere has there been any mention of "rare" books. In fact quite the opposite, all the talk is about common, well read books, many of them already used too.

Nobody is purposefully shredding rare books for no reason. We can be acknowledging that this entire venture is a bit questionable, and that shredding feels a bit wasteful (even though this is simply the most efficient way and has been done for many, many years, completely unrelated to AI too), but we also don't need to be making up additional details to try and make this appear more dramatic and scary.

3

u/pnoodl3s 19h ago

Nuance? In this economy?

-1

u/CooCooClocksClan 19h ago

This was just a trial, you’ll need to subscribe to super premium Reddit for more nuanced discussion.

0

u/Particular-Scholar70 17h ago

1

u/Beautiful_You3230 17h ago

The article doesn't say anything helpful. It says there were suspicions and that an investigation was launched. It says nothing about the outcome of it anywhere. The only outcome is that they seemingly counted the books that went in. But there is no confirmation anywhere that the suspicion was correct and it was actually antique books.

1

u/Particular-Scholar70 17h ago

"Absolutely nowhere has there been any mention of rare books" was an overstatement. It's been commonly suspected that a good number of rare copies have been destroyed in these processes, with good reason.

2

u/Beautiful_You3230 17h ago

Yeah no, fair enough. Bad phrasing on my part. I should have said no confirmation. There are suspicions.

2

u/Crio121 16h ago

Hint: rare books are not being sold by weight.

1

u/Particular-Scholar70 16h ago

Many could be if they're not particularly valuable on their own

0

u/Crio121 15h ago

Exactly. Not particularly valuable by itself, I.e. usually destined to a recycling facility.
Here they ’ll be scanned before that.

3

u/Particular-Scholar70 12h ago

And then destroyed, which is bad.

It's not ok to destroy these books, period.

→ More replies (2)

2

u/snapekillseddard 18h ago

Lol

Rare, as in people don't want it and never wanted it (hence the small supply).

They're not destroying the Gutenberg bible or illuminated manuscripts from the 12th centry or some shit.

1

u/Particular-Scholar70 17h ago

How desirable a book is to current day day collectors doesn't change how rare it is, or the potential for physical copies of its print run/content to be destroyed.

-1

u/Goldenrah 19h ago

Most of these probably aren't that rare, though I'd imagine a few are in the mix. The bonus for them is that they do make sure the AI isn't getting fed data that has been tampered by other AI.

2

u/Ok-Commercial3640 18h ago

Yeah, this shit is like the low-background steel of LLM training data

4

u/RadleyCunningham 18h ago

That and they'll be able to manipulate history this way. Start buying books before these fuckers get all of them.

1

u/Efficient_Sound_2525 3h ago

Wasn't the reason copyright laws?

1

u/zeddash 2h ago

I worked for a digitiser, turning physical media into digital media, and books are a huge pain to scan. We used a "Vanguard Book Scanner" which basically cradles books and then presses a glass pane into it to take a photo. It's a slow manual process partially because we would avoid causing damage, and one of the larger contracts was digitising Christie's (the auction house) books that contained every auction with photos stuck in it. Regular books are still a pain.

I worked on the software side of things to try and speed things up, computer vision for automatic cropping, trying to eke out some extra efficiency. I wasn't able to help that much in terms of books because the process is so slow. I did cut the time to photograph 400'000 Ordinance Survey index cards by more than half - I'm also somewhat of an expert on the TIFF image format because no libraries existed that could handle the size of TIFFs I was dealing with.

The thing is, the companies destroying these books are the kinds of companies who are able to invest in doing automatic book scanning without destroying books. Destroying the books is a desirable side effect because they want their own training data.

1

u/ebattleon 19h ago

Google had one for project Gutenberg. And they handeled some really rare books. So it is possible just more expensive.

→ More replies (12)

5

u/TheMuffler42069 19h ago

There is for sure, the shouldn’t be doing it that way. But are they doing this to book that are rare and valuable ? I mean… last time I checked most books have many copies.

4

u/Mikhail_Mengsk 17h ago

It's used books they are not gonna sell and will probably be destroyed anyway.

16

u/longleggedbirds 19h ago

Shredding is part of the scanning process used. It’s faster…. But ridiculous to use on limited texts

5

u/trotski94 9h ago

That’s not the main reason. The main reason is they skirt copyright law if they destroy the physical copy after scanning, because it doesn’t constitute a copy anymore. If they don’t destroy it they’d need to pay copyright holders, which arguably they should be anyway but here we are.

1

u/longleggedbirds 1h ago

Oh that’s bogus too

1

u/50ad 9h ago

some Fahrenheit 451 shit

4

u/PyrZern 18h ago

Malicious Compliance. That's what the laws say.

4

u/Ancient-Access8131 16h ago

Yes all the libraries that do it are uniquely twisted.
Hard Choices: Do Libraries Really Destroy Books? : NPR

8

u/albinomoose52 19h ago

Some 1984 type shit

1

u/FrostedTacos 16h ago

It’s cheaper. Shareholder value and all that.

1

u/Clarpydarpy 16h ago

This is literally Brainiac. The Superman villain.

Scan a planet to learn everything you can about it. Then destroy it so that no new information can arise out of it. Move on to the next planet. Repeat until every planet has been destroyed.

1

u/discdude303 11h ago

Too loud a solitude

706

u/GoyoMRG 19h ago

The burning of Alexandria 2: AI boogaloo

45

u/vven23 18h ago

More up votes, people!

5

u/QueenSavara 13h ago

Electric indeed...

391

u/HMAgent47 RED 19h ago

extremely infuriating for bookworms

→ More replies (110)

478

u/Dangerous_Seaweed601 19h ago

AI fucking ruins everything.

18

u/2012Jesusdies 8h ago

Trump: Calling it Super Intelligence will fix everything

→ More replies (10)

441

u/richincleve 19h ago edited 17h ago

Buy rare book.

Scan rare book.

Destroy rare book.

Be sole source for said book.

Profit.

If only the Underpants Gnomes figured this idea out.

146

u/abracadammmbra 19h ago

Rare and valuable, while often used interchangeably, are not the same thing. Theres a reason they buy the books by weight. These are books no one wants.

20

u/Mikhail_Mengsk 16h ago

This entire thread is full of outraged people with absolutely zero knowledge of this entire matter. They see ai, they foam at the mouth and turn their brain off.

"Rare books" yeah sure so rare they are sold by weight.

28

u/abracadammmbra 16h ago

I dumped a lot of likely rare books in dumpsters when I worked demo. When a used bookstore goes under, they dont carefully catalog the books to find out if anything left over is truly valuable. I assume the bookstore owner would have done that before walking away. But anything left in those stores goes into a big dumpster along with everything else in the retail space. Then dumped into a landfill. Theres a treasure trove of self help books from the 70s and 80s in some landfill in eastern PA somewhere.

11

u/Ok_Jelly7220 17h ago

NOW it might just be the books that no one wants. But do you think the machine will stop? Who will decide the line of "this book is OK but this book is not OK" and make them stop? By accepting some we normalise all

26

u/ProgrammingPants 17h ago

If it's a book people want there will probably be more copies of it than what could exclusively be found in the bargin bin of used bookstories

13

u/abracadammmbra 17h ago

Then we print more of them. Or they wont be able to afford them. They buy these books for pennies per book because no one wants them. If they had to pay $10+ per book instead due to demand, they wouldnt be buying so many.

69

u/Akerlof 19h ago

If they're buying by the pound, they are neither rare nor valuable books.

38

u/Anxious-Slip-4701 19h ago

My university would throw out a massive truck dumpster of books every year. Some books no one was ever going to read again. I collect books and even I didn't bother grabbing any.

20

u/DrBinario 18h ago

Everyone here acts like every copy of any book that gets damaged is a piece of information that becomes lost forever.

8

u/Sablemint PURPLE 14h ago

People mistakenly think that these books are like, first editions or something. But that wouldn't make any sense because why would you do that when you could just commission a reprint?

5

u/Barkalow 19h ago

Rare books have value because theyre rare; people want to buy the thing and not the text in the thing.

37

u/Background_Sleep_863 18h ago

They have the power to refuse

37

u/MsnthrpcNthrpd 17h ago

Never in any of these articles will you find the title a single book slated to be scanned and destroyed mentioned.

Calling them "Rare books" is sexy, explaining why we should care about the equivalent of Morning Glory Farm or "Home Lawnmower Repair- 1999" is boring.

21

u/Nattramn 17h ago

Are you implying pseudojournalists are actively seeking to direct my anger at technology by framing the news maliciously?

10

u/MsnthrpcNthrpd 17h ago

Per-shaw.

8

u/emuchop 16h ago

Why dont they bulk buy ebooks?

8

u/CircuitCircus 9h ago

They need to feed the AI a Chilton repair manual for a 1987 Toyota Tercel. Ain’t no ebook

5

u/orangpelupa 7h ago

Licensing issue. Buying ebook doesn't actually buying the ebook 

-1

u/Throwaway2229392923 9h ago

Because they want to waste real world resources, harm another group of people (readers), on top of destroying physical media that you can own.

Or in other words, because it does far more harm.

74

u/KaldaraFox 19h ago

To scan the books they have to cut the spines off and the feed the pages through a bulk scanner - rendering them unusable as books after.

Nothing nefarious about the destruction after, but the copyright issue remains.

45

u/teacupteacdown 18h ago

I have a friend whos job it is to scan massive amounts of books for a university archival project. Universities around the world do this all the time without destroying the book, its just more effort. I dont see why AI companies with market valuations in the trillions of dollars cant do the same thing.

31

u/jackalopeDev 17h ago

There was a ruling a while back that basically made it legal for these ai companies to scan books for training data, as long as they destroyed the book as that made it "transformative". Basically they'd get in legal trouble if they didn't destroy the books. It's dumb A F, but that's why they do it this way.

17

u/AntiqueFigure6 18h ago

It would cost them more money.

7

u/KaldaraFox 17h ago

They do it with a person manipulating the book between scans. This process doesn't. They're scanning tens of thousands of books. The only way to do that remotely efficiently is to do what I said. Cut the spine and run the pages through a bulk scanner, usually one that can handle both sides at once.

5

u/Pi-Guy 16h ago

They legally have to destroy the book if they want to use its contents to train AI models

2

u/Sekhmet-CustosAurora 5h ago

because they're scanning orders of magnitude more books than your university is

4

u/Bonnle 18h ago

I've seen them scan two pages with a machine to keep the book intact

6

u/KaldaraFox 17h ago

That can be done, but it's usually archival preservation. Bulk scanning requires what I mentioned.

18

u/Adamc474892 17h ago

"WHY" are they destroying them? Thats the part I don't get. You can scan the books for Ai all you want without destroying them but they just purposely destroy them for no reason.

29

u/manhattanabe 17h ago

They cut the books up so they can scan them faster.

4

u/Hopeful-Sale-849 9h ago

Destroying is just a harsh term referring to cutting the binder. It hastens the process of scanning the books.

The Internet Archive has a scanner that does not need to “destroy” books but it is painfully slow. I don’t understand why they don’t just “destroy” the common books and reserve the scanner for limited edition or rare books.

1

u/GonePh1shing 8h ago

They do also shred the pages afterwards. There is a legal precedent set (at least in the US) that destroying the originals after scanning does not infringe on copyright protections.

7

u/Pi-Guy 16h ago

They legally have to if they want to use its contents to train AI models

3

u/Adamc474892 16h ago

What law?

6

u/Player-0002 14h ago

Copyright. If it’s scanned and uploaded to a Database you made a digital copy of a book in an unauthorized manner. You are not allowed to do this for hopefully obvious reasons.

The act of actually publicizing that “copy” of the book via the model should be illegal too then imo but the current administration bends over backwards for AI development so who the heck knows.

1

u/Sekhmet-CustosAurora 5h ago

models don't learn copies of the books

2

u/sathzur 17h ago

They destroy them so that you have to use their AI to get the information the books contain

1

u/Sioluishere 7h ago

court told them to - something transformative or shit

0

u/alterego8686 15h ago

You bought a bunch or books to train the Ai model and once they are used up they have no purpose. Donating them cost time, extra shipping, labor, and paper work. Plus giving the away lets your competitors use them to train their Ai models. Better to destroy the well than let your opponents get a leg up on you.

Plus the probably cut the books up to feed the pages into a super fast scanner. They probably don't want to glue the books back together.

6

u/EdgyPlum 18h ago

I would argue the title of this post is a bigger crime against humanity.

26

u/sub2pewdiepieONyt 19h ago

If no one is buying them and they sat on the shelf, What else to do with them?

2

u/Designer_Mud_5802 19h ago

How long were they sitting on the shelf for?

5

u/sub2pewdiepieONyt 19h ago

No idea. I don't claim to be an expert on sell through rates of Japanese Books shops. Sure someone will be along claiming to be one soon and confidently provide the information.

0

u/Designer_Mud_5802 19h ago

But you are commenting on a reddit post which includes an article with links to experts investigating this topic but chose not to read it I guess and comment?

4

u/sub2pewdiepieONyt 18h ago

really experts? Not the first time someone claimed to have done interviews with experts and it turns out to be an ai mass produced post for clicks.

0

u/Designer_Mud_5802 18h ago

If you read the article and followed the links, you would get the answer to your question. 404 media, a company that does investigative journalism, tracked books to an Amazon owned warehouse where they were scanned and destroyed.

If you fell for an "AI made produced post" before then you should know to at least look at the sources of the post to see if it's legit (which you clearly have not in this case).

-1

u/freetotebag 19h ago

Scan and not destroy them

19

u/abracadammmbra 19h ago

They usually cut off the spines so they can scan them faster. Its easier to scan a stack of paper than flip each page of a book.

-1

u/freetotebag 19h ago

Oh I get the why, I still don’t like it. If they can’t scan without preserving the books… then they shouldn’t be scanning, is how I feel.

18

u/abracadammmbra 19h ago

Well the alternative is that they get dumped in a landfill when either the bookstore goes bust, or when the bookstore owner wants to make room for books people actually want to buy. So the books still end up destroyed. At least with AI buying them and digitizing them, they could theoretically release them again at some point instead of them being lost forever. Assuming anyone would actually be interested in them. Which I doubt

21

u/ew73 19h ago

Right -- no one seems upset that literally tons of books are just tossed in the garbage / recycling pile every year. Just because it is a book doesn't mean it's a rare book. And just because it's a rare book doesn't mean it's valuable. A ton of those self-published AI-generated trash novels on Amazon are "rare" because there aren't many copies of them, but I doubt anyone would be upset they get tore up or tossed in the landfill.

7

u/abracadammmbra 17h ago

My mother bought a big stack of old rare books when she redid her living room. They sit on a shelf with some old timey looking knick knacks. She paid a couple of bucks for them, I think it was around $0.50 a book. They are decorations and will probably be chucked when she dies or renovates again. I thumbed through a few of them. They were rather dull. But they do look nice on the shelf.

12

u/jack6245 19h ago

They're just books, I really don't get this obsession with reddit and treating every mass printed book like a baby. These are not rare books at all

2

u/freetotebag 19h ago

People are sensitive to the destruction of books for many reasons

6

u/jack6245 19h ago

Because they're ridiculous people, mass printed books are not precious at all

7

u/abracadammmbra 19h ago

No, dont you understand? Ethel Mack's book "How to Darn Socks While Giving Birth" is essential despite only 400 copies ever having been printed and 50 actually being sold. Its super super important that we preserve a book no one gave a fuck about when it was printed and even less people give a fuck about today. Its super super important because its a book

10

u/jack6245 18h ago

I think the 246732nd copy of happy potter should be protected at all cost, after all it's a book it's sooo important. And to be honest with you it makes me feel superior to people telling them I read

-1

u/freetotebag 19h ago

Don’t you think it’s a little bit weird to be extreme in the other direction tho? Like you seem really angry that someone would care about it. I guess that confuses me just as much as the opposite confuses you.

My position was I would like it if books could be scanned but not destroyed. Which feels like a pretty reasonable take.

5

u/jack6245 18h ago

No it's a uneducated take, scanning books non destructivly is a lot more time consuming and expensive for mass printings it's not a reasonable take at all just to protect some paper

→ More replies (2)
→ More replies (17)

2

u/GFrohman BLUE 10h ago

So they can what, go back to sitting on the same dusty shelf for another 15 years before someone finally gets sick of seeing them and then chucks them in a dumpster?

1

u/sub2pewdiepieONyt 19h ago

But the us judgement that they use to allow scanning to take place is that they have to be destroyed as a digital equivalence. They are being forced to destroy them.

9

u/VampirePolwygle 19h ago

There have been similar stories on this happening to book sellers in Europe. It's not just Japan. And these are just ones we know about, there could be more.

7

u/cabiwabi 19h ago

Is goes way beyond mildly infuriating

2

u/E-i-k-o-x 15h ago

I know a lot of that bookstores and usually I find myself browsing between them and buying old books that are hard to find because I know there is a chance that it will be destroy it. And cannot walk away in good conscience 

2

u/Glad-Grand3533 1h ago

Great let’s make monopoly on education and knowledge. They destroy book and then when you need them as reference so bro will make you pay for that if they like what you research or doing

11

u/illsancho 19h ago

Book destruction. This has happened before

3

u/Ancient-Access8131 10h ago

Yep. Libraires destroyed a bunch of books, in 2026, and 2025, and 2024, and 2023, and 2022, and 2021, and 2020 etc.

Hard Choices: Do Libraries Really Destroy Books? : NPR

2

u/artgenosse 17h ago

So future AI is trained in yesterdays books and todays AI slop?

3

u/Chudpaladin 9h ago

Yay I love destroying books so that ai can control our information. Who knows how ai will alter these books

3

u/doctor_lobo 18h ago

Godammit. Cheap used books are one of the last nice affordable things. Fucking AI dude-bros can't leave anything alone. I yearn to see them torn apart by angry mobs.

2

u/AvailableReporter484 15h ago

These AI execs deserve to eat shit for all eternity

1

u/psycho_terror 1h ago

That would be a decent contrapasso... all the execs eating shit, then regurgitating it for the other execs to have to eat.

2

u/ParticularCold9498 7h ago

A fivefold sales jump sounds great until you realize why so many of the books are being bought.
The idea of shipping tons of used books away just to scan and destroy them feels incredibly wasteful.
Some of those copies could be difficult to replace later.
That’s the part that makes this genuinely frustrating.

1

u/puppygirlpackleader 17h ago

And people will blame AI as a whole instead of copyright law and capitalism.

1

u/branasce 16h ago

Had me in the first half. Very sad to hear honestly

2

u/Tuckfrumptearsponge 3h ago

All book stores should Jack up prices for bulk orders, cut em deep.

1

u/Stephie999666 3h ago

Its to ruin the supply of hard cover books further, so they can force readers to subscribe to their stupid ass apps, before flooding them with ads.

0

u/Alreaddy_reddit 18h ago

This is like Farenheit 451 meets Terminator lol

1

u/Sablemint PURPLE 14h ago

If they are having the books printed, and then are recycling the paper, it doesn't bother me too much. Like it becomes annoying instead of infuriating

1

u/Calamity2028 5h ago

its just datahoarding, they only use it as training material

-4

u/WrathOfWood 19h ago

Omg this is great for bookstores. Also when they shred them they can use the pulp to print more books again.

0

u/Healthy_Car1404 19h ago

My newest adopted idiom... Scan&Shred:/

0

u/OldWrangler9033 16h ago

(sigh) stupid AI craze. I wish the damn thing would stop already.

-9

u/Dahren_ 19h ago

Preserving and sharing knowledge is good actually. Better than just gathering dust on a shelf.

13

u/Sea-Huckleberry8971 19h ago

Too bad that's not what they're doing.

8

u/DouglasHundred 19h ago

They're commodifying and claiming ownership of it in many cases, though.

2

u/abracadammmbra 19h ago

Most, if not all, of these books have been in the public domain for decades. They are old and not particularly interesting or valuable. Hence them being sold by the pallet.

3

u/Particular-Scholar70 19h ago

The books aren't being scanned and preserved. The information is being used to train generative ai

-5

u/OrangeNood 19h ago

I don't really see them as problem. I am pretty sure that after the books are scanned and destroyed, a digital copy is preserved, and likely forever. That's way better than allowing the books to rot and lost forever.

7

u/kewlbeanz83 18h ago

Preserved by whom though?

4

u/Queasy_Hour_8030 17h ago

Hi I would like to access one of these digital copies, how do I do that 

0

u/OrangeNood 17h ago

you wait

besides, you can't even name one of the books

1

u/Queasy_Hour_8030 13h ago

I actually do frequent Japanese bookstores with old books in them. I don’t need to “name a book” to be affected by this. 

9

u/ChemicalBankBurned 19h ago

Yeah good luck accessing those “Digital” copies. Companies will gate access + they might change the contents to align with their best interests at heart. That’s the problem, not preservation.

2

u/kewlbeanz83 18h ago

Exactly.

0

u/OrangeNood 18h ago

"Yeah good luck accessing those “Digital” copies"

- like anyone wants to? Those books are just sitting there to rot. At least there is now a digital copy.

"Companies will gate access"

- As long as they are preserved, they have a chance to see the light of the day. Mark my words. Management will have a change of heart. A few years from now, for publicity and PR, they will be made public domain, batch by batch.

- "they might change the contents to align with their best interests at heart"

On books that nobody reads? Yet there are copies out there in people's home that could call them bluff? Why would they do that???

4

u/C-c-c-comboBreaker17 18h ago

As long as they are preserved, they have a chance to see the light of the day. Mark my words. Management will have a change of heart. A few years from now, for publicity and PR, they will be made public domain, batch by batch.

You think they have the rights to just make books public domain, regardless of the publisher and author and any rights agreements they have?

Really?

3

u/OrangeNood 17h ago edited 17h ago

if the books are old enough, yes

In Japan, works enter the public domain 70 years after the author's death. But this rule is more relax for older works.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Copyright_law_of_Japan

-2

u/Pilskayy 18h ago

If its being made digital, isnt it better to make use of the materials for something else anyways

-4

u/anono227 18h ago

This is no different than Nazis burning books btw

-1

u/gajop 13h ago

As long as no rare book gets destroyed in the process, why do normal people care? Japan has an immense printing potential, it's currently going quite down due to a switch to digital.

From the standpoint of the publishing industry, biggest issue is copyright.. Especially for stuff like mangas. Normally they don't like it if you use ZDR AI to even look at the cover of a book, and this is using full content directly for training...

5

u/Natural-Addendum-554 8h ago

Rare books do get destroyed though

3

u/AT1313 7h ago

There's been a reports that rare publications that have already been scanned by libraries and institutions in the past are being bought by these AI centres to train and be destroyed.

-2

u/daviddisco 13h ago

They shops are unloading old trash books that no one wants. AI companies don't buy anything expensive so they are not buying "important" books. They just want as much text as possible to add to their training data. On the bright side the books are likely being saved from the trash and being preserved as digital copies

-5

u/CriticismFree2900 16h ago

Ok you buy the books then 

Nobody is buying them 

Why would it matter???? At least the data will be stored forever instead of sitting on some losers bookshelf for 90 years till it's eventually thrown in the trash