{"id":17806,"date":"2026-08-28T17:00:00","date_gmt":"2026-08-28T15:00:00","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/holistic.news\/en\/?p=17806"},"modified":"2026-08-27T13:12:26","modified_gmt":"2026-08-27T11:12:26","slug":"ai-companies-destroy-books-why","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/holistic.news\/en\/ai-companies-destroy-books-why\/","title":{"rendered":"AI Needs Human Words. So Companies Are Cutting Up Books"},"content":{"rendered":"\n

The internet alone is no longer enough<\/h2>\n\n\n\n

For years, AI models were trained mainly on content from the internet. Over time, however, the web has increasingly filled with automatically generated texts<\/strong>. Such material is often described as \u201cAI slop\u201d: mass-produced, uneven in quality, and often repeating information from other sources. Researchers and AI companies fear that models trained largely on machine-generated texts may, over time, produce worse and less varied answers.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Companies therefore began looking for \u201cclean\u201d data: texts written, edited, and published by human beings before generative artificial intelligence<\/a> became widespread. As a result, books published before late 2022, when ChatGPT was released, are especially attractive.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Printed publications have significant value for AI labs. They contain texts created by humans<\/strong> and refined by authors and editors. Importantly, they hold specialised knowledge and varied forms of expression. These are harder to find in the chaotic resources of the internet.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

The paradox of the digital industry<\/h3>\n\n\n\n

The paradox is clear. The most digital industry in the world is returning to paper books because, online, it is increasingly difficult to separate texts written by humans from those generated by machines<\/strong>. Accordingly, the book, until now primarily an object of reading and cultural circulation, becomes, in this model, a strategic raw material for data.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

The mechanism is simple. Companies, or intermediaries acting on their behalf, buy used, out-of-print, and niche titles. The books then go to facilities where their bindings are cut off and their pages are separated. Next, the sheets are fed through high-speed industrial scanners. The result is digital text that, once cleaned and processed, can feed internal data libraries<\/strong>.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Why AI companies destroy books<\/h2>\n\n\n\n

The AI industry destroys books because so-called destructive scanning is faster and cheaper than methods that require pages to be turned by hand or scanned with specialised equipment. This method allows large batches of publications to be digitised efficiently. However, it ends with the destruction of the paper copy.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

The best-documented case concerns Anthropic, the company behind the Claude chatbot. Declassified court documents show that the company bought millions of paper books<\/strong>, commissioned their cutting and scanning, and then stored the digital copies in an internal library used in work on AI models. Notably, one of the projects was called Project Panama<\/em>. An internal memo stated:<\/p>\n\n\n\n

\n

Project Panama is our initiative to destructively scan all the books in the world. (…) We don\u2019t want it known that we are working on this.<\/p>\n<\/blockquote>\n\n\n\n

Why is it all happening in secret?<\/h3>\n\n\n\n

The discretion is largely a matter of public image. Intermediaries offering book-buying services to technology companies<\/a> emphasized the importance of non-disclosure agreements and client anonymity<\/strong>. One company serving the book market put the calculation directly:<\/p>\n\n\n\n

\n

\u201cAn AI company destroys 2 million books\u201d is not the kind of headline that wins public sympathy.<\/p>\n<\/blockquote>\n\n\n\n

The anonymous nature of the purchases makes it difficult to determine the true scale of the practice<\/strong>. Court documents and journalistic investigations confirm destructive scanning in Anthropic\u2019s case. They do not, however, allow us to state precisely how many books have been destroyed in this way across the industry. What is known is that intermediaries advertised the ability to fulfil orders ranging from thousands of copies to as many as 1 million.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

After the issue drew public attention, some of them argued that they had not actually purchased books for AI training. Instead, they had merely been testing interest in such a service.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

\n