二手书销售正火。是因为人工智能吗?
Secondhand book sales are booming. Is it because of AI?

原始链接: https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/cp3rprx2wl4o

法庭文件披露了一项名为“巴拿马计划”(Project Panama)的 Anthropic 内部行动,旨在“破坏性地扫描世界上所有的书籍”以训练大语言模型。该流程涉及去除书脊,进行大规模工业化快速数字化,随后将残余部分回收。 书商反映,这些采购往往是随机的,涵盖从冷门的拉丁语文献到牛仔小说等各类书籍。专家认为,这种多样性表明人工智能公司正专门针对稀有资料进行采集,以提升模型训练效果。 这些做法的合法性仍存在争议。尽管人工智能公司一直秉持“快速行动,打破常规”的理念,但法学学者艾米丽·哈德森(Emily Hudson)教授指出,根据英国法律,此类大规模复制通常需要版权持有人的明确许可。这些披露凸显了生成式人工智能的快速发展与知识产权保护之间持续存在的紧张关系。

近期的一场 Hacker News 讨论探讨了有关人工智能公司购买并批量销毁实体书以训练模型的消息。讨论主要集中在两个方面:这一过程的法律依据,以及对此引发的文化反响。 在法律层面,一些用户指出,法院曾允许这种破坏性扫描,因为这能防止产生未经授权的“额外”副本,实际上是将数字化转换视为替代而非复制。批评者认为这种逻辑荒谬,认为它助长了浪费,并反映了过时的版权法——迫使企业为了规避法律责任而进行表演性的销毁。 在文化层面,观点呈现两极分化。一些人认为“纸浆化”书籍是一种“毫无灵魂”的行为,无论书籍是常见还是稀有,都抛弃了人类历史。另一些人则为这种做法辩护,认为这是一种实用主义的、对旧材料的转化利用,而这些书原本也注定要被送往垃圾填埋场。许多参与者一致认为,更广泛的问题不在于销毁本身,而在于现代版权法的限制性,这阻碍了数字时代知识的广泛合法保存。大多数评论者认为,行业应当专注于对这些作品进行归档,而不是简单地销毁其实体载体。
相关文章

原文

The court documents relating to the Anthropic case revealed the project of ingesting old books was referred to in internal company communications as "Project Panama."

The documents indicated the company's aim was to "destructively scan all the books in the world".

Destructive scanning is the process of shipping books to locations where they can be digitised at an industrial scale.

It includes removing a book's spine so all the pages can be scanned rapidly - and the remains recycled.

"A lot of mystery surrounds Project Panama," Manley, from Barter Books, says.

"The name is new to me, but the reality of the project is not, and has been the subject of much discussion on the bookseller forums."

He does not know that his books are being bought for it or similar projects by other AI firms.

But he says it's also difficult to account for the sales, which appear random with "no rhyme or reason."

They have varied from obscure Latin texts to cowboy novels.

Experts say the diverse subject matter also points to AI, as unusual and rare texts could provide fresh material to improve the training of large language models, the tech which underpins generative AI tools like chatbots.

Professor Emily Hudson, intellectual property specialist at Oxford University, says copyright laws in the UK are different to those in the US.

"The starting point in the UK is that all these acts of copying - creating the training library and doing the training – require the permission of the copyright owner," she says.

联系我们 contact @ memedata.com