753
Amazon Caught Destroying Rare Books to Train AI
(futurism.com)
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
this post was submitted on 17 Aug 2026
753 points (98.6% liked)
Technology
87315 readers
3852 users here now
This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.
Our Rules
- Follow the lemmy.world rules.
- Only tech related news or articles.
- Be excellent to each other!
- Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
- Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
- Politics threads may be removed.
- No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
- Only approved bots from the list below, this includes using AI responses and summaries. To ask if your bot can be added please contact a mod.
- Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed
- Accounts 7 days and younger will have their posts automatically removed.
Approved Bots
founded 3 years ago
MODERATORS
They sent a tracker in a book before the article was written. Before they knew it was Amazon. It only turned out to be Amazon, but when they sent it, it could have been anyone.
I feel like I have to ask: are you associated with the source? Your inability to understand my very simple and straightforward point is suspicious.
Uh yeah. That's why they knew it was Amazon. If it ended up somewhere else, the article would be different, and shills for space billionaires would have to come up with something else to concern troll about.
No, but since this is your level of politeness and since you've ignored basic statements like "corporations are not people" and claims the Epstein class needs to be exposed, I need to ask: are they paying you to shill for them, or do you do it for free?
Yes!! Finally!!
What if it ended up at a mom and pop store? Are they deserving of privacy?
Then the article would probably be very different or not written at all, which is what I said already.
You're not responding to the Epstein class question I see. Really makes you think
Is this for real?
They sent a secret tracker before the article was written. The problem isn't the article, it's putting a secret tracker in the order. Would you like secret trackers in your orders, or would you consider that an invasion of privacy?
Seriously, I don't know any other way to say it.
I look forward to seeing evidence of that.
Of the Epstein Class? It's called the Epstein Files, although the Epstein Class defenders will tell you that it's dangerous to release those files because "somebody innocent could get hurt." I asked you point blank twice (now three times) why you're shilling for them, with the same degree of "good faith" you demonstrated toward me.
Except I was capable of answering and you weren't, which makes one think.
I get it, you want journalists silenced and you need to wrap that in whataboutism to make it happen, but sometimes tools can be good or bad depending on how they're used. "You don't want to be bombed, so Dresden shouldn't have been bombed either" is not the moral high ground you think it is.
I meant it would be nice to see evidence of thinking lol
I'm "shilling" (lol) for privacy. Journalists shouldn't be mailing hidden trackers to anyone. That's probably illegal. It definitely should be.
You're aligning yourself with the Epstein Class while concern trolling about privacy. They are the ones violating people's privacy every single day and enjoying protection the average person cannot afford. They are the ones hiding private jet flight records while tracking people's driving habits.
Appeals to human decency only work when you manage to have any yourself, and I see little evidence of that.
I'm not appealing to any decency from you (hilarious). I'm just asking for some consistency. You presumably think violations of privacy are bad, but here you are cheering on one.
I'm certain you understand the point I've been making, you're just unwilling to be intellectually honest about it.
Good luck.
@XLE @joe Actually I don't think they're understanding the distinction between the two. They're stuck on "Amazon is bad so context doesn't matter"