I really don't care. Books aren't sacred, and the information in them will be far more accessible once digitized and trained than it would sitting on a shelf where no one will read it.
False dichotomy. The books could have been digitized WITHOUT being destroyed.
There’s no reason to assume that digital ebooks/documents will be accessible or readable to anyone in say 75 years. A physical book will be just as accessible today, as it will be practically forever. Okay there’s the acid paper thing but still… there’s no reason for Anthropic to destroy the books.
Comments
I really don't care. Books aren't sacred, and the information in them will be far more accessible once digitized and trained than it would sitting on a shelf where no one will read it.
I would argue that books are sacred & anyone destroying books is a bad person.
History seems to agree - bad people did usually destroy a lot of books.
False dichotomy. The books could have been digitized WITHOUT being destroyed.
There’s no reason to assume that digital ebooks/documents will be accessible or readable to anyone in say 75 years. A physical book will be just as accessible today, as it will be practically forever. Okay there’s the acid paper thing but still… there’s no reason for Anthropic to destroy the books.