251
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 23 Aug 2026
251 points (97.0% liked)
Privacy
6045 readers
122 users here now
Welcome! This is a community for all those who are interested in protecting their privacy.
Rules
PS: Don't be a smartass and try to game the system, we'll know if you're breaking the rules when we see it!
- Be civil and no prejudice
- Don't promote big-tech software
- No apathy and defeatism for privacy (i.e. "They already have my data, why bother?")
- No reposting of news that was already posted
- No crypto, blockchain, NFTs
- No Xitter links (if absolutely necessary, use xcancel)
Related communities:
Some of these are only vaguely related, but great communities.
- !opensource@programming.dev
- !selfhosting@slrpnk.net / !selfhosted@lemmy.world
- !piracy@lemmy.dbzer0.com
- !drm@lemmy.dbzer0.com
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
Because if you get all the copies of a rare book, scan it and destroy it, then nobody else can use it for training but you. They don't have to, they choose to.
According to David Gerard (youtube podcast link) they cut off the spines of the books to allow for rapid scanning
Edit: Ars Technica too, thanks alapakala
Yes, but being the only one able to get their hands on that book and destroying it has that added benefit. My point is that there is no motivation to preserve those books, quite the opposite in fact.
Most "rare" books exist in digital format.
Then they are not rare by definition. These are not the books they are buying.
Yeah they are. The company needs to scan their own physical copy, for legal reasons.
They did it your way, and people screamed bloody murder about "piracy," so now they're doing this. Anyone who demanded they do things "the right way" meant, this. Whether they knew it or not.
At the core of it is a rotten person making rotten decisions. That's why each solution is worse than the previous.
the first person that actually speaks sense in this thread