Edit history

Without details it feels, like a fear, uncertainty, doubt strategy just for the clicks, to me. I’m missing crucial information for an informed decision. The article is not suitable for much more than igniting anger.

LLM and AI companies rise a lot of valid criticism, besides its undeniable pros. I don’t like a witch hunt just because it is AI and someone tells me to be angry. I need more facts before I go fetch my pitchfork.

I.e. I dont get why they destroy the books. Google Books did fine without unbinding/ destroying books. It would help to know what kind of books are processed. And what their process is.

I don’t have information if the OCRed data is made available to the public. Which would be nice, since the article talks about data that is not yet digitally available.

Without details it feels, like a fear, uncertainty, doubt strategy just for the clicks, to me. I’m missing crucial information for an informed decision. The article is not suitable for much more than igniting anger.

LLM and AI companies rise a lot of valid criticism, besides its undeniable pros. I don’t like a witch hunt just because it is AI and someone tells me to be angry. I need more facts before I go fetch my pitchfork.

I.e. I dont get why they destroy the books. Google Books did fine without unbinding/ destroying books. It would help to know what kind of books are processed. And what the process is.

I don’t have information if the OCRed data is made available to the public. Which would be nice, since the article talks about data that is not yet digitally available.

Without details it feels, like a fear, uncertainty, doubt strategy just for the clicks, to me. I’m missing crucial information for an informed decision. The article is not suitable for much more than igniting anger. Many questions stay unanswered.

LLM and AI companies rise a lot of valid criticism, besides its undeniable pros. I don’t like a witch hunt just because it is AI and someone tells me to be angry. I need more facts before I go fetch my pitchfork.

I.e. I dont get why they destroy the books. Google Books did fine without unbinding/ destroying books. It would help to know what kind of books are processed. And what the process is.

I don’t have information if the OCRed data is made available to the public. Which would be nice, since the article talks about data that is not yet digitally available.

Without details it feels like a fear, uncertainty, doubt strategy for the clicks to me. I’m missing crucial information for an informed decision. The article is not suitable for much more than igniting anger. Many questions stay unanswered.

LLM and AI companies rise a lot of valid criticism, besides its undeniable pros. I don’t like a witch hunt just because it is AI and someone tells me to be angry. I need more facts before I go fetch my pitchfork.

I.e. I dont get why they destroy the books. Google Books did fine without unbinding/ destroying books. It would help to know what kind of books are processed. And what the process is.

I don’t have information if the OCRed data is made available to the public. Which would be nice, since the article talks about data that is not yet digitally available.