4 ms·

Obligatory Orwell quote: “Every record has been destroyed or falsified, every book rewritten, every picture has been repainted, every statue and street buildin

Obligatory Orwell quote: “Every record has been destroyed or falsified, every book rewritten, every picture has been repainted, every statue and street building has been renamed, every date has been altered. And the process is continuing day by day and minute by minute. History has stopped. Nothing exists except an endless present in which the Party is always right.”

andsoitis 4y ago
Does this apply to the case where the owner (rather than the state), makes slight edits (this case)? I mean, it is not like the books have been rewritten or history erased, has it?
- nhchris 4y ago
  Absent from your question is the author [1]. The owners may have the legal right to edit and distribute the text, but by passing it off as Roald Dahl's words, they are perpetrating fraud against their readers. And even if it were the author doing it, it would be dishonest to have multiple versions under the same title, unless there was a note at least briefly mentioning alterations. [1] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=35017707 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=35017707
  - andsoitis 4y ago
    Penguin, the publisher, has decided to also publish the classic versions: https://abcnews.go.com/Business/wireStory/penguin-publish-classic-roald-dahl-books-after-backlash-97441402 https://abcnews.go.com/Business/wireStory/penguin-publish-cl...
    - pseudo0 4y ago
      So they are removing the original copies from e-readers and then forcing people to buy it again? What a grift.
    - justsomehnguy 4y ago
      So what? Can I rewrite any book as I want and for any cries just say "Hey! I printed an original version! The whole 10 copies! Locked in the bottom of a locked filing cabinet stuck in a disused lavatory with a sign on the door saying 'Beware of The Leopard'?
      - andsoitis 4y ago
        Actually, your comment sparked a new thought for me. What if this (two concurrently published versions of the books) is purely an emergent property of our increasingly bifurcating society?
        justsomehnguy 4y ago
        Psst! Hey, man! That's what was for years! It's just the publishers weren't in the same country or even in the same political block.
- teolandon 4y ago
  No, it does not, but people here really like bringing it up.
  - wizofaus 4y ago
    I'm not usually a fan of slippery slope arguments but it's still worth asking: at what point do you decide it has truly become dangerously Orwellian and worth protesting against? Certainly it does strike me there's a certain disregard for consumers here. Imagine if your electronic copy of your favourite music that you listened to regularly was altered in some way by the publisher that you felt destroyed your enjoyment of it? It's actually one reason I'm not a fan of streaming services and only buy music I can keep copies of the files for - so I can be certain it will always be available in exactly the form I want it no matter what the publisher/ service provider does (including going broke or deciding to remove certain music from their catalogues etc.).
userbinator 4y ago
This one also fits: "He who controls the past controls the future. He who controls the present controls the past."

andsoitis 4y ago

Does this apply to the case where the owner (rather than the state), makes slight edits (this case)? I mean, it is not like the books have been rewritten or history erased, has it?

nhchris 4y ago
Absent from your question is the author [1]. The owners may have the legal right to edit and distribute the text, but by passing it off as Roald Dahl's words, they are perpetrating fraud against their readers. And even if it were the author doing it, it would be dishonest to have multiple versions under the same title, unless there was a note at least briefly mentioning alterations. [1] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=35017707 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=35017707
- andsoitis 4y ago
  Penguin, the publisher, has decided to also publish the classic versions: https://abcnews.go.com/Business/wireStory/penguin-publish-classic-roald-dahl-books-after-backlash-97441402 https://abcnews.go.com/Business/wireStory/penguin-publish-cl...
  - pseudo0 4y ago
    So they are removing the original copies from e-readers and then forcing people to buy it again? What a grift.
  - justsomehnguy 4y ago
    So what? Can I rewrite any book as I want and for any cries just say "Hey! I printed an original version! The whole 10 copies! Locked in the bottom of a locked filing cabinet stuck in a disused lavatory with a sign on the door saying 'Beware of The Leopard'?
    - andsoitis 4y ago
      Actually, your comment sparked a new thought for me. What if this (two concurrently published versions of the books) is purely an emergent property of our increasingly bifurcating society?
      - justsomehnguy 4y ago
        Psst! Hey, man! That's what was for years! It's just the publishers weren't in the same country or even in the same political block.
teolandon 4y ago
No, it does not, but people here really like bringing it up.
- wizofaus 4y ago
  I'm not usually a fan of slippery slope arguments but it's still worth asking: at what point do you decide it has truly become dangerously Orwellian and worth protesting against? Certainly it does strike me there's a certain disregard for consumers here. Imagine if your electronic copy of your favourite music that you listened to regularly was altered in some way by the publisher that you felt destroyed your enjoyment of it? It's actually one reason I'm not a fan of streaming services and only buy music I can keep copies of the files for - so I can be certain it will always be available in exactly the form I want it no matter what the publisher/ service provider does (including going broke or deciding to remove certain music from their catalogues etc.).

userbinator 4y ago

This one also fits: "He who controls the past controls the future. He who controls the present controls the past."