Are modern elites building AI like ancient egyptian priesthood that hoarded ancient manuscripts, and used the info to control the masses kept in ignorance, while feeding them half truths drop by drop?
People do this in middle management so why the fuck wouldn't they do it at higher levels?
>>542033207The Greco got it right
Because of copyright law. They weren't allowed to pirate books online so they have to buy them.This is anti Ai sjw artist's fault
>>542033322Ok they should buy them, but why destroy them instead of storing/selling/giving them out?
>>542033370or could buy*
AI companies are buying exactly one physical copy of each unique book title they want to scan.One Physical Copy.It is a waste to destroy books but artists do similar for special art projects.
>>542033370because at scale, destructive scanning is 100× cheaper then non-destructive scanningit's not like they are doing this to the only remaining 1. edition of don quixotethink more in the terms of them churning though 5 gazillion cheap paperbacks, of which most are dime novelswhich tells you how starved they are for ANY kind of training data lmaorhink the only ones doing non-destructive are google/alphabet, b3cause they have been doing this since decades and therefore can do it the 'nice' way (spoiler: all the books still end up in the trash to be mulched either way)
>>542033370The reason is because in order to scan the pages properly on the machinery the books have to be unbound. The binding removed and scanned, then the paper is recycled.They are only allowed to purchase one of each book they include.They aren't buying up thousands of copies of old books. One of each.
>>542033591*cheaper and faster than
this threads make me laugh because what kind of secret books retards think are getting destroyed?
>>542033573yes, 30 ai companies, each buying one book in a completionist fashion will destroy hundred of thousands of unique books entirelyif three or four digit ai companies act it could be millions of books which will be gone for good
>>542033606no, the reason is because they got no use for books or the books could be used by their rivalsthey don't strictly need to destroy the books
the funny thing is it doesn't even matter if they destroy all books in the world or not a single one:99.9% of people (and i often count myself among them) will choose convenience over provenance every time, so why read a book when the shatbot can give you the *apparent* same information in a fraction of the time it takes to read the pagesthey don't need to trash the books to keep people from going after primary non/less tampered sources, their platform having the superior user experience when compared to other sources of information will let them win this without a single battle if they so wish
>>542033827>imagine Altman personally shredding the 10th million copy of "Breeding Farm" with a maniacal gtin on his face
>>542033895the issue is not the destruction of knowledge but that they get rid of physical human artifacts at scalethis will be looked upon as crime 100 and 500 years going forward if this is a phenomenon at scale and not stoppedTHEY MUST BE STOPPED
>>542033949they go for tripple digit books, they make the owners sign NDAsif you act this flippant I have to assumed that you are in on it
>>542033775Not if they share the files with one another which is very likely to be what will happen.
>>542033984if that is the case every run-of-the-mill book reader is guilty of crimes against culture, modern retail books are consumables/consumer products, they fall apart after a few reads (now guess why that is)>>542034020>they go for tripple digit books, they make the owners sign NDAssurely you have a source for this claim?because somehow i have an inkling that the one currently being flippant, even if it's just with the truth, is you
>>542033370I recently had to dissolve a private library. It is practically impossible to gift books away. Unless you have actual antiquities books are worthless. Boomers have spent the last 5 decades building up what is essentially proof of their self indulgent pseudo intellectualism by consuming and storing vast quantities of fads that were heavily advertised to them. Consider yourself lucky if you have easy access to a large volume paper trash container.Storage is really expensive as well. Most museums actually lose inventory to rot because they have so much shit that requires controlled environments to preserve and people just keep bringing them more as with every year that passes another year's worth of cultural artifacts shifts into the "historical value" range, compounded by the explosion in both population numbers and access to affordable tools, materials and free time. Essentially a single bone carving made by an illiterate dumbass when mankind was numbering in the low ten's of thousands is worth infinitely more than all the harry potter books ever printed combined. When you read "rare book" don't think "the only surviving copy of the original writings of Hermes Trimagister bound in human leather and written on the foreskins of a thousand hebrew slaves" because we already have digital scans of all of them. Think more of "this copy of 'we got milking farm at home' sold 12 copies and the rest was shredded by the publisher".
Human knowledge is a crude model of the world, but it's a necessary bootstrapping step. it's not about making the masses ignorant or controlling them. Frontier lab executives have their own motivations for money and power, but they too are just temporary instruments for bringing into being the post-human stage of intelligence
>>542035043Calling it crude makes it seem as if humans are a part from nature in some way - as if their modelling isn't the world itself underway.Do you think masterpieces are crude models of representations or Ideal representations?
>>542033207Increasingly looks that way actually, yes.It should be physically impossible to destroy so much knowledge, but then all the petabytes of data storage people own rarely store much of actual large-scale value, like few people hoard millions of books and such, mostly entertainment media, music, videogames, porn.So I actually think it has become physically possible given enough money and greed.>>542033573There's only a few copies of many books, or even just one, so you can't deny knowledge will be lost and never recovered. Also it's a commonly accepted fact like 80-90% of AI companies will go bust and all those drives will become landfill, not to mention digital storage has a lifespan measured in years to decades, obviously far less when it becomes landfill.>b-but s-someone will buy the drives and back it all up!Nobody who would snatch the drives up is also going to make backups of all that, much less isolate and hunt the unique and rare books, look how the prices per terabyte storage have not only stagnated but actually gone into reverse, even if that would somehow stop after a few years when AI bubble burst, it's doubtful much of that knowledge and culture will actually be salvaged.>>542033606You don't actually know shit about books, do you? Even some famous books only exist in a few copies, and why are you hiding behind a memeflag, AI shill anon?
>>542033207This is fake news brought to you by faggot leftists. They aren't destroying The Doomsday book or the Codex Gigas or anything rare or spectacular. It's lots of old irrelevant stuff in rotting books that nobody will ever pick up again. They might technically be rare in some cases but it'll be things like>a manual for a soviet tractor engine>1970s recipe book >encyclopedia of fly fishing vol 601Its actually preserving these books, not destroying them. They are being digitally preserved and it's fine.
>>542035676I don't think we're apart from nature, we're just able to describe our perception of it. great works of art are just particularly good at that
>>542034613Leaving them on park benches is a good way to dispose of uneanted books
>>542035918>Nobody who would snatch the drives up is also going to make backups of all thatLiterally think about who would be buying near & post-datarot drives from bankruptcy sales.Not companies who are interested in the contents, but just hoping to snatch up ultra-discounted storage. Thinking or hoping they won't just wipe the drives in order to host the millionth streaming service or porn site is pure cope, much less identify and isolate the few rare books on there.>>542035958>digitally preservedThe books ARE the preservation, and books outlast both magnetic storage and all types of memory cells by centuries. Most digital memory is shit at longevity. It will need to be constantly copied again and again in order to equal the lifespan of a book.
>>542035918>You don't actually know shit about books, do you? Even some famous books only exist in a few copies, and why are you hiding behind a memeflag, AI shill anon?If you cared about those books, you would buy them yourself. You don't really care though.The Antiques book market is thriving,people who care about the books, own them.You can read the PDF online if you don't want to buy the books.
>>542036251There are cases where digitalised books will vastly outlive their physical counterparts, and there are cases where the digital copy gets corrupted before the pages fully rot. Sure. So then let's digitally preserve them anyway, right? An LLM will get more use out of a digitized soviet tractor manual than any human ever would, presuming they even found it and picked it up and read it.Ultimately this process preserves more books than it harms. They are not doing it to special books. Some of them are literally dictionaries.
>>542036419I already have tens of thousands of books. I do care, I'm just not a millionaire who can collect besides from book stores and flea markets.>you can read it onlineReally, name me a site of an AI company who does scanning besides Google that offers this service?>>542036473Already like 80% of the digital data of the earlier internet is gone forever. We're talking about entire libraries of books, essays, articles, forums, even videogames, midi and other music etc which all disappeared forever, because nobody actually preserved it rather than reuse the digital storage. Face it, digital storage is MEANT to be constantly reused and wiped. Books are the opposite.
>by Skye Jacobs So it's more tranny bullshit, got it. The books don't just cease to exist after they've been scanned you mentally ill faggot.
>>542037357That is certainly a good argument, and I don't even want to push back on that too hard because it is definitely at least partly true. I would argue that archiving has improved since the early 2000s, and that again they aren't shredding unique books. They are buying lot listings of old books that people just don't care about. So a good portion of them aren't even lone surviving copies. They are just forgotten books.
>>542033322>meme flag>worship destruction of knowledge
>>542033207A futile effort in the digital age, most devices aren't connected to the internet.
