All the offense is that books are being destroyed. They're being destroyed b/c that's slicing off the binding to get flat pages is most convenient way to scan them. But ... could AI firms sidestep all the vitriol by paying to rebind the guillotined pages? I have no experience with such things, but if they were willing get the machines to do paperback thermal bindings (even if they sliced open a hardcover) and then donate or resell the books back into the marketplace, a lot of the "destroying rare books" emotions
could be avoided.
This mindset is so strange to me. Destroying books is anathema? These are niche subjects for books that may only have a few copies in the world. This knowledge should be digitized so it can be available and shared for thousands of years.
Better yet, why not raise prices by 10x for these online AI orders? Then again, I suppose you don’t really run a book shop in 2026 because you want to make money.
If the book really is difficult to come by I don't know that I'd prefer it to only survive as a statistical approximation that can be mostly retrieved if you utter the correct incantation. The AI trainers don't care about the book. It's just a commodified stream of words.
Most people do not support the destruction of books - it seems like the issue in both cases is copyright forcing the destruction and non-release of the scan.
They don't have to destroy the books to scan them. There are techniques for doing it non-destructively, but they're slower and more expensive. It's cheaper to cut the spines off and drop the stack of papers on a flatbed scanner with a paper feeder.
For those wondering why she's wearing wool and gloves indoors - New Zealanders typically can't afford electric heating, and wear woolen clothing in doors to to make up for this, when they can't burn firewood or coal.
Often kiwis can afford it but just choose not to. My own parents are well off and yet still have an absolutely freezing house all winter, it drives me crazy. Just put on a sweater, and another one over that, and a blanket....
as the country grapples with record numbers of citizens leaving the country because of a weak economy, high living costs and high unemployment.
More than 60% of those moved to Australia, where average weekly incomes are higher and New Zealand citizens have work and residency rights.
The spokesperson did not elaborate on when the family arrived in Australia nor what kind of work they were doing, but noted it was not unusual for former leaders to spend time overseas after leaving office.
Of course they have very low wealth inequality so they don’t have trillionaires at all which some people may see as a problem. In fact remarkably despite the median wealth of NZ being so much higher than the USA they have a lower average wealth per capita.
They just spread the wealth around making the middle class 3x richer.
Wikipedia's (UBS') US figure ($69k) is probably wrong? US median household wealth is ~$193k[1]. I don't think there's a way to square claimed median individual wealth of $69k with that? Even taking into account children (22% population) and assuming 2 adults/household (more favorable to the math than the real 1.2-1.4 figure). I can't find anything on UBS' methodology, just the short 1.5 page paper.
I don't have an explanation for this but I did note that the 2023 UBS report had US Median Wealth per adult at $107K[1].
I wonder if there is a per adult vs per person vs per working person difference in the measurement or something like that?
Edit: I've dug into this more, and the closest thing I can come up with for an explanation is that UBS changed its model for 2026 to "normalize household debt" in order to make it more comparable across countries. There doesn't seem to be sufficient information to explain how that change caused such a radical change.
How are they finding these books to order? I can't find used bookstores online anywhere.
All the offense is that books are being destroyed. They're being destroyed b/c that's slicing off the binding to get flat pages is most convenient way to scan them. But ... could AI firms sidestep all the vitriol by paying to rebind the guillotined pages? I have no experience with such things, but if they were willing get the machines to do paperback thermal bindings (even if they sliced open a hardcover) and then donate or resell the books back into the marketplace, a lot of the "destroying rare books" emotions could be avoided.
This mindset is so strange to me. Destroying books is anathema? These are niche subjects for books that may only have a few copies in the world. This knowledge should be digitized so it can be available and shared for thousands of years.
Better yet, why not raise prices by 10x for these online AI orders? Then again, I suppose you don’t really run a book shop in 2026 because you want to make money.
There's a bit of history to destroying books. So yes, anathema.
If the book really is difficult to come by I don't know that I'd prefer it to only survive as a statistical approximation that can be mostly retrieved if you utter the correct incantation. The AI trainers don't care about the book. It's just a commodified stream of words.
Except we know they're going to digitize it, use that data to feed an AI, and never release it to the world.
Legally they can't, they would immediately land in copyright claim hell.
Most people do not support the destruction of books - it seems like the issue in both cases is copyright forcing the destruction and non-release of the scan.
They don't have to destroy the books to scan them. There are techniques for doing it non-destructively, but they're slower and more expensive. It's cheaper to cut the spines off and drop the stack of papers on a flatbed scanner with a paper feeder.
[dead]
For those wondering why she's wearing wool and gloves indoors - New Zealanders typically can't afford electric heating, and wear woolen clothing in doors to to make up for this, when they can't burn firewood or coal.
Often kiwis can afford it but just choose not to. My own parents are well off and yet still have an absolutely freezing house all winter, it drives me crazy. Just put on a sweater, and another one over that, and a blanket....
More likely a second hand book store in Newtown is an old and draughty building. Running a heater in there would be the same as running one outdoors.
Or she just gets cold. My daughter wears those kind of gloves all winter regardless of how warm we heat the house.
What percentage of New Zealanders do you think live somehwere that isn't cold and draughty?
Jacinda Ardern and her family.
Because she’s so reviled by New Zealanders she left NZ.
Fairly opinionated framing given:
Jacinda Ardern living and working in Australia after move from US - https://www.theguardian.com/world/2026/feb/26/jacinda-ardern...New Zealand has always been a place people with talent leave (and often return to upon retirement or making a fortune).
eg: Ernest left in his post grad years: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ernest_Rutherford
That’s a funny callback to last weeks RNZ article https://www.rnz.co.nz/life/wellbeing/cosy-ways-to-keep-warm-...
Lol but seriously 4th highest median wealth per capita. The median NZ citizen has 3x the wealth of the median us citizen.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_wealth_pe...
Of course they have very low wealth inequality so they don’t have trillionaires at all which some people may see as a problem. In fact remarkably despite the median wealth of NZ being so much higher than the USA they have a lower average wealth per capita.
They just spread the wealth around making the middle class 3x richer.
Wikipedia's (UBS') US figure ($69k) is probably wrong? US median household wealth is ~$193k[1]. I don't think there's a way to square claimed median individual wealth of $69k with that? Even taking into account children (22% population) and assuming 2 adults/household (more favorable to the math than the real 1.2-1.4 figure). I can't find anything on UBS' methodology, just the short 1.5 page paper.
[1]: https://www.federalreserve.gov/econres/scfindex.htm
I don't have an explanation for this but I did note that the 2023 UBS report had US Median Wealth per adult at $107K[1].
I wonder if there is a per adult vs per person vs per working person difference in the measurement or something like that?
Edit: I've dug into this more, and the closest thing I can come up with for an explanation is that UBS changed its model for 2026 to "normalize household debt" in order to make it more comparable across countries. There doesn't seem to be sufficient information to explain how that change caused such a radical change.
[1]https://web.archive.org/web/20230815103944/https://www.ubs.c...
That wealthy is all tied up in draughty houses. It's not real.