AI companies are buying large volumes of used, rare, and out-of-print books, scanning them for training data, and in many cases destroying the physical copies afterward.
This practice has accelerated as labs seek high-quality, pre-2022 human-written text free of AI-generated content that now saturates much of the open web.
The most documented example is Anthropic’s internal effort known as Project Panama. Court filings from copyright litigation revealed that the company acquired millions of physical books from used-book sellers and wholesalers such as Better World Books. Workers used hydraulic cutting machines to slice off the spines, fed the loose pages into industrial high-speed scanners, and then discarded or pulped the remains. An internal planning document described the goal as an effort to destructively scan books at massive scale. A federal judge later ruled that purchasing the books, creating internal digital copies this way, and destroying the originals constituted transformative fair use under U.S. copyright law, relying in part on the first-sale doctrine.
Similar activity is now widespread. Specialized brokers, including ISBNdb, openly market bulk acquisition services to AI labs, offering orders ranging from thousands to as many as one million titles. They emphasize older printed books as “structurally clean” training data.
Booksellers in the United States and Europe have reported sudden surges in bulk orders for mixed, random selections that include rare and out-of-print volumes. Some of these titles may represent among the last readily available physical copies. While a substantial portion of the books involved would otherwise have been remaindered, recycled, or sent to landfills, the inclusion of uncommon editions has drawn criticism from archivists, collectors, and rare-book dealers who note that gentler, non-destructive scanning methods exist yet are slower and more expensive.
The process remains largely quiet because the intermediary services promise anonymity to their AI clients. Public attention has grown mainly through litigation disclosures and reporting by outlets that examined the court records and interviewed booksellers.
The practice highlights a practical tension in large-scale AI development: the demand for vast quantities of reliable human text collides with the finite physical supply of older printed works and the cultural value of preserving rare copies.
Some people still haven't seen the video of the private rocket that was launched into the atmosphere and smacked straight into the firmament dome, so here it is.
Space is fake, no human has ever gone past that barrier covering our Earth at around 73 miles (117km)
This is why every rocket launch you've ever watched on TV makes a giant arched rainbow shape. They are being yeeted into the Bermuda Triangle rocket graveyard, right off the coast of Cape Canaveral.
[📽️yt: terry eicher]
You're 35. Your glasses prescription was −2.00 at 18. It's −5.00 now.
You can't see anything without glasses these days at all.
You spend 9 hours on screens. You wear your glasses. You just got a stronger pair. You've stopped bringing it up.
You don't have a vision problem. You have a signal problem.
In 2010, researchers at Queensland University put 28 adults under one hour of hyperopic defocus — the same type of blur your glasses create when you look at a screen.
Axial length increased by +8 µm. -> Eyesight is measurably worse, in ONE HOUR.
They tried the opposite — myopic defocus. Same 60 minutes. Same subjects.
Axial length decreased by −13 µm. -> Vision measurably improves, with eyeball LENGTH reducing.
One blur grows your eye. The other shrinks it. p < 0.0001. (Read et al., IOVS 2010)
Your optometrist lens subscription seller gives you full correction for distance. You wear that same prescription to look at a phone 30 cm from your face.
Your eyes under-accommodate. Research confirms myopes have ~2× the accommodative lag of emmetropes — about 0.6 D of hyperopic defocus at near. (PMC9544228)
That's the same signal that made the +8 µm happen. Every screen session. Every year.
In 2023, a JAMA Pediatrics RCT (n=263) found that naked-eye 3D vision training — creating myopic defocus — reduced axial elongation by 24%. With high adherence, 40%. (Xie et al., JAMA Pediatr 2024)
A 2025 study (n=208) showed visual training dropped axial elongation from 0.38 mm/year to 0.23 mm/year — 39.5% reduction. And it was additive — it worked on top of orthokeratology, atropine, and defocus lenses with no statistically significant difference between combinations. (Xu et al., Clin Optom 2025)
In 2025, a preprint documented full reversal of −6.00 D myopia in an adult in 5 months — using only myopic defocus and consciously triggered accommodation. n=1, not peer-reviewed. But the trajectory is suggestive. (Martinez-Saito, OSF 2025)
The industry has known since 2002 that passive undercorrection backfires. The Chung study showed giving kids −0.75 D blur with no training made things worse. Critics cite this endlessly. They ignore that it tested passive blur — not differential lenses + active focus. Apples and hand grenades.
The endmyopia approach is different:
Wear differential lenses (1.5–2.0 D weaker aka "computer glasses") for close work — eliminates the hyperopic defocus stimulus entirely
Wear normalized lenses (slightly weaker) for distance — creates mild myopic defocus
Active focus — consciously clear the blur, retraining the ciliary muscle
Two roads. One is a lifetime lens subscription sold by retail optometry, the other is you taking back control.
Keep feeding your eyes the signal that says "grow longer, clearer" — 8 hours a day, every day.
Or fix the signal.
Nobody is coming to tell you this. They make 150 billion dollars a year counting on you not figuring it out.
🚨 SHOCKING: Australia, the SKIN CANCER CAPITAL OF THE WORLD, just Dropped a Bombshell 🚨
They're finally admitting popular sunscreens are packed with CANCER-LINKED chemicals... fragrance toxins, parabens, petroleum byproducts, and 4-MBC (banned in parts of Europe for wrecking hormones).
We’ve been rubbing this on our kids’ skin for decades... while melanoma explodes.
The very product pushed as our savior may be making us sicker.
WHY are we terrified of the Sun... the literal source of life, yet trust chemical cocktails from corporations that profit from our fear?
Is sunscreen fueling the cancer epidemic it claims to prevent?
Vitamin D deficiency
= higher cancer risk.
Sun avoidance = disaster.
Coincidence?
Or the biggest medical
gaslight in history?
Your skin is absorbing endocrine disruptors daily.
Your children’s future fertility and health are on the line.
Wake up.
What are you putting on your body this summer?
Repost if this hit you like a slap on a burnt back.
The truth must burn
brighter than any SPF lie.
Let me know what you think,
and SHARE THIS so that others may too.
And if you're not already following @TrueOnX...
What the heck are you doing?!
THE CYCLE CLOCK HAS ONE DATE LOCKED IN OCTOBER 9
More than a decade of data and this rhythm has never broken
Bull phase: 1,064 days
Bear phase: 364 days
2015-2017 → 1,064 days up
2017-2018 → 364 days down
2018-2021 → 1,064 days up
2021-2022 → 364 days down
2022-2025 → 1,064 days up
2025-2026 → 364 days down
One date emerges from every calculation October 9, 2026
Zero exceptions across every cycle this pattern has run
Reach your muscle goals 💪 Stick to this simple plan to succeed: 1. Take a 1-minute quiz 2. Get a workout and meal plan 3. Follow the program (easy-peasy)