Skip to content

Against AI: An Open Letter From Writers to Penguin Random House, HarperCollins, Simon & Schuster, Hachette Book Group, Macmillan, and all other publishers of America

Technology
34 17 532
  • I guess, but print on demand is also more expensive than printing in bulk, when looking per unit, and of lower quality (paper and binding). I'm not too familiar with the details of book publishing but I wouldn't expect that people are not using this route simply because they failed to notice its benefits.

    As someone who loves books, I avoid print-on-demand. Most of the time they end up with terrible, jpeg artifact ridden covers, disorganized page breaks, and terrible quality text.

  • Everyone wants to protect their money under a capitalistic system. Where were you when all of the typewriter repairmen lost their jobs? Society and technology change and evolve over time.

    AI written books have no value.

    If it was not worth writing, it is not worth reading.

  • 🤣 🤣

    If there's money to be made by releasing books created by Counterfeit Cognizance, those publishers will take advantage of it to its fullest... Count on it.

    Nice try, but...

    🤡 🖕 💩

    Your points don't get better just because you coined/found a new term

  • “We want our publishers to stand with us. To make a pledge that they will never release books that were created by machines.”

    I see this as the 2025 equivalent of the entertainment industry's collective backlash against Napster back in the day. The issue will probably be decided by courts and legislatures, as before, and that legal decision will be transmuted into fierce morality, as before. The major difference is that in 1999 the legal combatants were a whole industry vs a handful of software developers and basically Lawrence Lessig, whereas with AI they're all corporations with tons of money at stake. So the outcome could easily be very different this time, and our crowdsourced moral standards could follow suit.

  • I guess, but print on demand is also more expensive than printing in bulk, when looking per unit, and of lower quality (paper and binding). I'm not too familiar with the details of book publishing but I wouldn't expect that people are not using this route simply because they failed to notice its benefits.

    Print on demand is more expensive because you’re paying a premium for never having to actually spend your own money. This is why these get rich quick types use it, because again literally anybody can do this with basically no money and all of the “expenses” only happen when people actually buy the stuff. Once that happens, the printer takes its cut directly from the sale and then passes on the rest to you without you having to do literally anything or spending any money out of your own pocket.

    As for the quality, there’s literally no reason that a book that is printed on demand has to be low quality or use low quality materials. It quite literally only seems like that because the only people who are doing this right now are rich quick types who don’t actually care about what they’re selling and are just trying to minimize the cut the printer takes because that means more money for them.

    And all of this is honestly moot anyway because you wouldn’t do this with the intention of using on-demand printing long-term. You would do it just to get started and then as the business grows, it will eventually be able to take advantage of more economical, but high capital investment opportunities like bulk publishing. I only brought it up because it’s literally never been easier to boot strap a business and the proof is the fact that Amazon is filled with AI generated garbage books. So like I’m just not willing to entertain the idea that an individual who literally has fans and clout should have a more difficult time selling books this way than a literal nobody scam artist pushing garbage.

  • I think the thing about fair use is that you don't need permission

    The key here is that this is a reasonable legal hurdle. It would be like the terms of service you never read when installing a piece of software.

  • Your points don't get better just because you coined/found a new term

    Aaannd...

    Yours don't improve by you being a jackass. But, doing so will earn you a quick block. Bye.

  • Print on demand is more expensive because you’re paying a premium for never having to actually spend your own money. This is why these get rich quick types use it, because again literally anybody can do this with basically no money and all of the “expenses” only happen when people actually buy the stuff. Once that happens, the printer takes its cut directly from the sale and then passes on the rest to you without you having to do literally anything or spending any money out of your own pocket.

    As for the quality, there’s literally no reason that a book that is printed on demand has to be low quality or use low quality materials. It quite literally only seems like that because the only people who are doing this right now are rich quick types who don’t actually care about what they’re selling and are just trying to minimize the cut the printer takes because that means more money for them.

    And all of this is honestly moot anyway because you wouldn’t do this with the intention of using on-demand printing long-term. You would do it just to get started and then as the business grows, it will eventually be able to take advantage of more economical, but high capital investment opportunities like bulk publishing. I only brought it up because it’s literally never been easier to boot strap a business and the proof is the fact that Amazon is filled with AI generated garbage books. So like I’m just not willing to entertain the idea that an individual who literally has fans and clout should have a more difficult time selling books this way than a literal nobody scam artist pushing garbage.

    because you’re paying

    Well no, it's the buyer who is paying. Which they might find off-putting, if the final price is too high, so you get fewer buyers and less profit.

    As for the quality, there’s literally no reason that a book that is printed on demand has to be low quality or use low quality materials.

    Except that in practice they simply are of lower quality. I've seen quite enough of such books. Maybe higher quality materials could be used, but that would raise the price for the end-user even more, and possibly slow down the production.

    and the proof is the fact that Amazon is filled with AI generated garbage books

    One has to wonder how much money they actually make, though. I saw some YT videos about the topic, IIRC it's really difficult. Their mere presence doesn't prove their profitability but only the belief by many people that they could be profitable.

    It's easy to start a business, sure. But you didn't explain the rest of the process and don't seem to actually know a lot about the particulars of book publishing (neither do I, but whatever I do know doesn't agree with your imagined "solution").

  • As someone who loves books, I avoid print-on-demand. Most of the time they end up with terrible, jpeg artifact ridden covers, disorganized page breaks, and terrible quality text.

    Yeah, usually they're just sourced from public-domain book collections such as Google Books (who scan older books which can end up visually messy), and I'm pretty sure some of those that are offered on Amazon were straight-up based on pirated PDFs.

  • Aaannd...

    Yours don't improve by you being a jackass. But, doing so will earn you a quick block. Bye.

    Bro found the block button

  • The future of Vim builds for Windows

    Technology technology
    37
    47 Stimmen
    37 Beiträge
    11 Aufrufe
    S
    Þey are good at þat, when being used. Use and training are two different operations, þough, and I'm targeting scrapers harvesting training data from social media, not LLMs trying to read social media for... reasons? Government monitoring? Corporate overlords building user profiles? If I were trying to foil þe latter wiť thorns, I agree, it'd be even more foolish.
  • 278 Stimmen
    70 Beiträge
    142 Aufrufe
    T
    don’t forget climate change
  • 721 Stimmen
    67 Beiträge
    340 Aufrufe
    S
    All the research I am aware of - including what I referenced in the previous comment, is that people are honest by default, except for a few people who lie a lot. Boris Johnson is a serial liar and clearly falls into that camp. I believe that you believe that, but a couple of surveys are not a sufficient argument to prove the fundamental good of all humanity. If honesty were not the default, why would we believe what anyone has to say in situations where they have an incentive to lie, which is often? Why are such a small proportion of people criminals and fraudsters when for a lot of crimes, someone smart and cautious has a very low chance of being caught? I think this is just a lack of imagination. i will go through your scenarios and provide an answer but i don't think it's going to achieve anything, we just fundamentally disagree on this. why would we believe what anyone has to say in situations where they have an incentive to lie, which is often? You shouldn't. edit : You use experience with this person or in general, to make a judgement call about whether or not you want to listen to what they have to say until more data is available. You continue to refine based on accumulated experience. Why are such a small proportion of people criminals and fraudsters when for a lot of crimes, someone smart and cautious has a very low chance of being caught? A lot of assumptions and leaps here. Firstly crime implies actual law, which is different in different places, so let's assume for now we are talking about the current laws in the uk. Criminals implies someone who has been caught and prosecuted for breaking a law, I'm going with that assumption because "everyone who has ever broken a law" is a ridiculous interpretation. So to encompass the assumptions: Why are such a small proportion of people who have been caught and prosecuted for breaking the law in the uk, when someone smart and caution has a very low chance of being caught? I hope you can see how nonsensical that question is. The evolutionary argument goes like this: social animals have selection pressure for traits that help the social group, because the social group contains related individuals, as well as carrying memetically inheritable behaviours. This means that the most successful groups are the ones that work well together. A group first of all has an incentive to punish individuals who act selfishly to harm the group - this will mean the group contains mostly individuals who, through self interest, will not betray the group. But a group which doesn’t have to spend energy finding and punishing traitorous individuals because it doesn’t contain as many in the first place will do even better. This creates a selection pressure behind mere self interest. That's a nicely worded very bias interpretation. social animals have selection pressure for traits that help the social group, because the social group contains related individuals, as well as carrying memetically inheritable behaviours. This is fine. This means that the most successful groups are the ones that work well together. That's a jump, working well together might not be the desirable trait in this instance. But let's assume it is for now. A group first of all has an incentive to punish individuals who act selfishly to harm the group - this will mean the group contains mostly individuals who, through self interest, will not betray the group. Reductive and assumptive, you're also conflating selfishness with betrayal, you can have on without the other, depending on perceived definitions of course. But a group which doesn’t have to spend energy finding and punishing traitorous individuals because it doesn’t contain as many in the first place will do even better. This creates a selection pressure behind mere self interest. Additional reduction and a further unsupported jump, individuals are more than just a single trait, selfishness might be desirable in certain scenarios or it might be a part of an individual who's other traits make up for it in a tribal context. The process of seeking and the focused attention might be a preferential selection trait that benefits the group. Powerful grifters try to protect themselves yes, but who got punished for pointing out that Boris is a serial liar? Everyone who has been negatively impacted by the policies enacted and consequences of everything that was achieved on the back of those lies. Because being ignored is still a punishment if there are negative consequences. But let's pick a more active punishment, protesting. Protest in a way we don't like or about a subject we don't approve of, it's now illegal to protest unless we give permission. That's reductive, but indicative of what happened in broad strokes. Have you read what the current government has said about the previous one? I'd imagine something along the lines of what the previous government said about the one before ? As a society we generally hate that kind of behaviour. Society as a whole does not protect wealth and power; wealth and power forms its own group which tries to protect itself. Depends on how you define society as a whole. By population, i agree. By actual power to enact change(without extreme measures), less so Convenient that you don't include the wealth and power as part of society, like its some other separate thing. You should care because it entirely colours how you interact with political life. “Shady behaviour” is about intent as well as outcome, and we are talking in this thread about shady behaviour, and hence about intent. See [POINT A]
  • Google search boss says AI isn’t killing search clicks

    Technology technology
    49
    1
    173 Stimmen
    49 Beiträge
    317 Aufrufe
    dave@lemmy.nzD
    Holy crap, I hadn't considered that we have the technology to create articles on the fly based on search terms. That could be a serious weapon of war - you get your site to the top through SEO, then show each user personalised propoganda. You show googlebot the genuine page but adjust the page based on what you know about the user.
  • Diego

    Technology technology
    1
    1
    0 Stimmen
    1 Beiträge
    23 Aufrufe
    Niemand hat geantwortet
  • 157 Stimmen
    12 Beiträge
    120 Aufrufe
    W
    that's not just useless defeatism, but also false. effective end to end encryption exists in multiple forms today. signal, maybe even with a custom server. matrix if the server is being ran on trusted hardware. XMPP too with the right extensions.
  • 178 Stimmen
    78 Beiträge
    1k Aufrufe
    L
    Rooted/Custom ROM users are so tiny, That's what I told her to tell you.
  • 80 Stimmen
    8 Beiträge
    89 Aufrufe
    P
    I expect them to give shareholders and directors a haircut before laying off workers, yes. But we know Microsoft never does that, so they can go f themselves.