But donate them to whom? The books were one step away from the pulpers when they bought them in the first place, who's going to take them that values them more than that?
Also, these companies are not charities. What do they gain out of all that extra expense?
Oh, I'd thought he'd died already.
Ah well. Soon.
Well, who's talking about buying?
How else do you think they got the books?
IMO the upvote/downvote system is the Fediverse's biggest mistake, and eliminating it its biggest missed opportunity. There simply isn't enough of a userbase for it to be meaningful, most threads end up with just a few dozen comments so sorting them by vote ratio doesn't really accomplish much. Meanwhile it helps drive communities into ever tighter social bubbles by giving such an easy mechanism to express "go away" vibes to anyone with a view that isn't perfectly in line with the existing consensus.
Here on social media we get to ensure that we only associate with other "normal" people. By our definition of "normal."
And then we get shocked when we discover that large numbers of people out there are not, in fact, "normal." Often when an election happens.
I can literally look out my window right this moment and see the yard sign I've got up opposing separatism. I've canvassed for anti-separatist movements, I phone banked for the NDP in the most recent provincial election, I went door to door in support of them. I live in one of the ridings that sent an NDP member to parliament, I voted for them too.
But yeah, clearly I'm the bigot here. It annoys me that Alberta is considered a big blob of traitors and racists and therefore I must be a racist myself.
Do you not see how this kind of attitude is harmful?
We would have anyway. One of the common symptoms of dementia is obsession.
I can imagine a couple of reasons.
The most straightforward one actually is "capitalism", but maybe if I explain it a bit you'll accept it? :) I expect that the vast majority of the books that these companies are scanning are bought in bulk from wholesalers at the cheapest possible price, since the goal is quantity over quality. That means they're probably buying the leftover books that the wholesalers are just one short step away from sending off to be recycled into pulp anyway. So re-binding them would mean they're still left with nearly-worthless books that nobody else wanted to buy. It's like those book sales libraries have from time to time, they put out the books that are scheduled for "disposal" in hopes that somebody will pick up a few before they go into the dumpster.
The other reason depends on the physical nature of the book. There's lots of different book binding techniques and not all of them will leave you with something that's easy to put back together. Lots of books are made up of smaller subunits of pages called "signatures", typically 8, 16, or 32 pages, that get stitched together into the finished product. There are coil-bound books, comb-bound books, all sorts of things like that. A lot of them probably wouldn't leave pages that are amenable to a one-size-fits-all rebinding. So that makes things a lot more costly, and again that's a cost that produces a book that's probably worthless for resale anyway.
Honestly I suspect that getting chopped and scanned is the best case scenario for most of the books in this situation. It converts them to digital form, rescuing their contents from being lost. The thing that bugs me is just how these companies squirrel away their hoards of books from the public. And the blame for that lies largely on copyright law, so I can't blame them too much.
They were numbered in the order that they were "discovered" (or theorized, in the case of population III). Similar to how exoplanets around a particular star are designated "a", "b", "c", etc. in order of discovery, so they usually end up not in any particular order in terms of orbital radii or size. Sometimes letters end up skipped when a letter is assigned and then it's discovered to be a false positive.
So there's logic to it, just not the logic one might prefer.
Is it one of those setups with a glass wedge the partly-open book is placed on with two digital cameras under it to photograph the pages? I've seen those contraptions, they're neat and I'd love to have one for my personal library someday.
The thing the headlines keep skipping over in pursuit of outrage-clicks is that this is how you scan books in bulk. The spine is removed and the pages are fed through a high-speed scanner in sequence.
And the books that these companies are scanning this way are not "rare" in the sense of Gutenberg bibles or first-editions of famous works. These are books that have been sitting untouched in libraries or warehouses for decades because nobody wants them and their alternative fate is simply to be pulped and recycled. AI companies aren't interested in quality, they're interested in quantity. It would indeed be nice if they'd release the results of doing these scans to the public, of course, but that's where copyright raises its head to ruin everything. They're just following the law, unfortunately.
I'm all for getting more books scanned and uploaded to Anna's Archive. But that's a separate issue.
First people complained about them pirating, now people are complaining about them following copyright. It should be clear at this point that the people complaining don't really care about either, they just don't like AI.