[xp84]

I really don’t think there’s any demand out there for re-bound used paper books when most books can be had in their real binding for $3 or less. It would cost at least $3 to re-bind, then they’d have to be listed on Amazon marketplace in “Poor condition” where they’d be valued at maybe $0.50 and cost $3 to ship, and they’d take years of warehousing at great expense waiting to be sold.

As for needy people, they already have libraries and an endless stream of books being donated to thrift stores. Nothing of value was lost here.

[mkagenius]

> Nothing of value was lost here

But then they shouldn't have done that in the first place. It seems like a crime to destroy so many books.

Imagine, 10 more companies come to join the AI race and decide to do the same.

[kjkjadksj]

To be fair, a book is fundamentally a wear item. I remember learning how my university library had its own incinerator. After a certain point it makes no sense to have 30 copies of an outdated textbook taking up space in the racks. Same goes for beatup old fiction and what have you. One might think a little urban school or branch library might want some but they too deal with realities of shelf space constraints and would probably prefer that their patrons had materials more current or in better shape.

That being said, I’m sure these companies did not exclusively buy books at the end of their life.

[xp84]

Books are printed in very large quantities, and there isn't infinite warehousing space for them "just in case." Surplus books just get sent straight to recycling all the time to make room for new books. I would be surprised if while this project was running, it represented even 10% of the daily books being destroyed. It's just never been practical to save every book printed forever.