A rule that dates back to when books were rare, expensive, and useful I suspect.
Many books are just electronic garbage at this point, and backing them all up is like going to a landfill and saying "We should make another one, exactly like this one, in case this landfill proves to be valuable to someone, someday."
It might be useful for LLM training to produce garbage. Although many say they already do a good job at that already.
I don't think you seriously suggest that there aren't books worth saving published even today, so the argument left over is who determines what is worth saving? The only reasonable answer to that question is: nobody.
I think that there are books published today - especially published today - that aren't worth "saving".
I'd start with every single AI generated book that's said to be available on Amazon (300 or so iirc).
And people can and do judge things all the time: Nobel prizes, juried contests, review boards, movies, music, and yes - even books! - as being worthwhile or garbage. Rotten tomatoes, Nobel prize committees, and so on.
So yeah, I think your answer is not the only reasonable one. And maybe 41% is way too low.
Many books are just electronic garbage at this point, and backing them all up is like going to a landfill and saying "We should make another one, exactly like this one, in case this landfill proves to be valuable to someone, someday."
It might be useful for LLM training to produce garbage. Although many say they already do a good job at that already.