I'm genuinely surprised they don't.
If they ever cared enough about bad PR, they have much bigger items to think about, like the proposed data center. Rare books probably wouldn't even make it their top 5 bad-press list
So that tells you that they know what they're doing is wrong / controversial and that they needed to shape their actions based on that fact.
The course of action they took tells you a lot about the people making these decisions.
Companies are immune to bad PR in this fast news cycle. Everyone has already moved on to the next injustice in less then 24 hours.
Surprisingly you'll even get downvoted for "living in the past" if you attempt to bring it up later.
Why would they avoid doing things people dislike if the PR outcome is the same?
You think someone's picking up a first edition Steinbeck and destroying it so it gets into the next training corpus?
Or is it like, technical manuals and incredibly dry almanac content?
I think the details actually matter here. I'd love to see a realtime list of these titles being scanned and processed. Then we'd know if anyone actually gives a care.
That said I'm willfully ignorant of most "headline news" so I'd be curious to see how heinous the issue really is.
I doubt the low-paid workers stripping, scanning and shredding the books are checking what anything is. I'd imagine they are dumped with a big crate of old books and an hourly quota they have to rapidly process.
Arguably old technical manuals with limited print runs are even rarer or more valuable to historians. We have lots of copies of Steinbeck, albeit not first editions.
You don't think they are, at the very least, checking to see if the book has been scanned before?
A search like that could very easily be extended to check for rare books too.
Why do you assume it's not being done?
We don't know, and the fact that the process is so opaque and would have been totally undisclosed if not for journalists doesn't exactly make me confident they are "doing things by the book" on this one.
No?
Sorry, but I'm going to save my efforts for the people who are ACTUALLY doing bad things - not just the people who I don't like who MIGHT be doing bad things.
Otherwise it kinda seems hysterical. IMHO.
No. It definitely isn't. There are plenty of US companies, one of them large and recognizable, that actually make it their mission to give you access to information in some fashion.
We have different definitions of "bad thing". In my opinion, unilaterally potentially erasing human history is already bad. Is it the worst thing someone could do? No, probably not, but that doesn't mean I shouldn't be bothered by it. I'm not sure what kind of argument you're really trying to make here.
I don't find LLMs that valuable, a few companies being the only providers of "frontier" models bothers me, and their possibly destroying works of historical interest also bothers me. Until they come out and find a way to make their scans available to the public, I'm not going to be happy about this. In my opinion, you shouldn't be happy about it either. These companies have everything to gain by making it harder for you to access knowledge (so that you are forced to pay them continuously for their "knowledge" in the form of information sparse LLM tokens). They have almost nothing to gain by enhancing your access to knowledge.
My point is I don't understand how someone can get mad about something they're not even sure is happening.
Are you aware that the publishing industry itself has destroyed more than 500X as many books as Anthropic ever will?
Your concerns seem misguided.
But I suspect we'll just have to agree to disagree on that one. You have a nice day.
I'm not sure why everyone on hacker news so often falls for the "my friends are jumping off the bridge, so I can too" fallacy. Not to mention, there are clear differences between the processes under consideration, which might bother you, even if the outcome is the same. No, I don't care that publishers destroy books because usually they only do that when the book has proven to fail to sell (not the case here, clearly, since the books were sold!) and out of necessity because of resource constraints and not because they are using them to build a proprietary alternative product they plan on charging me for. I don't understand why people are engaging is such shoddy, shallow thinking here.
I think the difference in our viewpoints ultimately lies in our faith in the companies involved. I have little to no faith that the digital scans of these texts will make it out to the public based on historical behavior of companies and the current legal complications around copyright. As such, I find it grossly unfair for several companies, which have significantly more economic and logistical resources than interested individual buyers, to systematically purchase rare works and thereby prevent individuals from accessing those works, possibly in perpetuity. The point is that even if they were to eventually release these, they are effectively, as of now, as of my lifetime, no longer available. Again, we have little information on the specifics, but it's the principle of the matter, the gross asymmetry here, that bothers me. It's all worsened by the fact that they are doing this so that they can use a commodity which you could have paid for once to train a new utility, tokens, that they want to charge you for on a metered basis.
If I understand you, you seem to be more confident that they might eventually release the works, or you are less bothered by the power asymmetries here. I actually do hope you turn out to be correct, and they find a way to release the material, or at least tell us what they bought. However, I doubt this will happen.
I hope you have a good day too! Thanks for sharing your perspective on the matter.
The idea they're simply shredding human history is too one-sided and alarmist. There is a huge long tail of rare-ish old and scrappy books out there that are definitely not the last copy of anything.
That said, I'm pretty sure a very small % of these books fall into the mistake category. But life!
I love how Oregon showed how to solve the electricity problem and is being entirely ignored. THEY'RE STEALING OUR ELECTRICITY!!!
Every book that has been published in the United States has a copy in the Library of Congress.
Neutron Radiography: Proceedings of the First World Conference San Diego, California, U.S.A. December 7–10, 1981 is a rare book - there's only one copy available from used book sellers on Amazon.
There is a copy of it in the Library of Congress. https://search.catalog.loc.gov/instances/b220c9bd-63ad-5a8b-... . You can go to the Science and Business reading room and request it so you can read it. https://www.loc.gov/research-centers/science-and-business/ab...
For any book that has been published, you can do this. It might not be in the United States if it wasn't published here... it would be in other national libraries (Tom Scott This library has every book ever published. https://youtu.be/ZNVuIU6UUiM )
Chasing links from the article you linked gives examples. https://nltimes.nl/2026/06/25/rare-book-dealers-fear-tech-fi...
“We have compiled a very extensive list of editions that we are currently trying to acquire, and we plan to place a fairly large order. The list is attached,” the email said.
The attachment contained 3,000 English-language titles organized by ISBN number, including books such as Distinct Element Modelling in Geomechanics by K.R. Saxena (1999); Barrett's Traditional Fairy Tales (2021), an academic study of Irish folklore; and Laser Shock Peening of Advanced Ceramics by Pratik Shukla (2018).
Some of these are from other countries. For example, Barrett's Traditional Fairy Tales is from Ireland. https://catalogue.nli.ie/Record/vtls000896773/StaffViewMARCThe last copy of a book is not destroyed.