Book Burning

[artisticsolution]

I just read this thread created by marjoramblues this morning...

viewtopic.php?f=15&p=107607#p107607

She/he said, "Yes, Chaz, and it seems to get stanger and stranger by the day - to buy a real book. I look at others on my shelves, sitting there, yellowing."

This got me to thinking of the future in a "what if" type of way....I allowed my mind to drift to a place in between the past and the future based to come to a fantasy of what might happen to books and authors in a future scenario based on human behavior of the past. Seeing as human nature is probably not going to change, it seems to me that this new idea of changing over to electronic books instead of hard copies might make it easier in the future to effectively "ban books."

I believe it is probable that hard copies of books will be a thing of the past as people or libraries will have no need to store millions of copies of old books and instead just filing them all in an electronic fashion. Sure...some really rare old valuable books will be "saved" under glass...but the majority of books will probably be destroyed and then listed in huge reference data base....at least in the near future.

But then what about farther into the future...when a new age of crazy book burning mentality rears it's ugly head again? How easy it would be to burn all the "offensive" books by just a touch of a button? How easy would it be to erase the past and silence a generation's voice or any controversial idea for that matter.

I guess I am a little sensitive as to the direction humanity seems to be taking recently. I see much more support for banning ideas and it worries me. The thing that worries me most is the popularity of the idea we must ban certain things. For example, Yesterday...I read a story about a woman being banned from facebook for posting pictures of her deformed newborn who only was able to live for 8 hours because of his birth defect. When I mention this to my husband and mother in law, they said, "Good...I agree she should be banned...it is weird to post a picture of a deformed dead baby." This blew me away! I argue that she had just as much right to post her newborn as thousands of other women post their newborns pics. And as for others being affected by the "hideousness"...well...we see worse than that everyday when we turn on our TV. Was the movie the Elephant man banned so that no one should have to look upon deformity? No...and neither should a woman be banned just for wishing to post a pic on facebook.

Anyway, I have always been shy of using facebook...as I did not like the control it had on people's lives...it was like "big brother" to me....but now...that they set out to ban certain users because they wish to post a picture in memory of their loved one who passed away...facebook can certainly shove it. Only now...in addition to not using their services and just looking the other way...I will mention my disdain for them every time someone speaks their name. I know it may not do much...but who knows...if they keep controlling the public as they do...there may come a times where they step on everyone's toes....but I digress...where was I again.... oh yeah...book banning not FACEbook banning ... OMG! I'm one of them!!!

[marjoramblues]

Always interesting to see how one-liners can spark others off in so many directions

I was a bit hesitant about starting a thread on Machiavelli's The Prince.

First, because Philosophy of Politics is out of my comfort zone - but hey, sometimes you just gotta go and get lost in a maze-ment.

Second, I wanted to try and achieve a thread that would have a clear aim and not get too carried away or knotted - worse still - thread bare. Hence my following Nigel Warburton's Chapter - it just might keep me from roaming off down side alleys.

Third, I didn't want it to be too controlled or serious - I love shooting the breeze, and am looking forward to a sparkling conversation.

Fourth, - why did I start with this numbering thing ?

More importantly, thanks AS for being able to take your thoughts and start up a new thread - sometimes it's easier just to respond directly to the post. I try hard not to do that, zooming off topic - it comes from enthusiasm and needing to share any 'bright sparks'. But it can be annoying to new philo readers who click on to... say 'The Antichrist' and have to wade through umpteen pages to reach the gems. Anyway, that's another thread, sorry

I share some of your concerns re the future. I see us being plugged in only to the information that 'They' want us to know about - and that takes us back nicely to Machiavelli !
And probably off shoots on to the Phil of Politics forum - how would you govern if you were a 'Princess' ?

Now, where were we - Book Burning ? Creative word play - I thought at first Amazon was having a Fire Sale

[Impenitent]

save a tree, don't print books

save a tree, use online books

save a tree, curb hate speech, limit the amount of information available online

free speech?

ah progress...

-Imp

[Thundril]

It's a lot easier to make and distribute a copy of an ebook. today I can store a thousand works that some future eejit might condemn as subversive. And if he (it usually is a 'he') tries to wipe them off the 'net, i'll just copy and redistribute, and so will thousands of other people who give a damn.
So i reckon obliterating literature will get harder...

[John]

I just read this thread created by marjoramblues this morning...

viewtopic.php?f=15&p=107607#p107607

She/he said, "Yes, Chaz, and it seems to get stanger and stranger by the day - to buy a real book. I look at others on my shelves, sitting there, yellowing."

This got me to thinking of the future in a "what if" type of way....I allowed my mind to drift to a place in between the past and the future based to come to a fantasy of what might happen to books and authors in a future scenario based on human behavior of the past. Seeing as human nature is probably not going to change, it seems to me that this new idea of changing over to electronic books instead of hard copies might make it easier in the future to effectively "ban books."

This reminded me of the incident a couple of years ago when Amazon remotely deleted bought copies of Orwell's 1984 and Animal Farm from people's Kindles because they had been uploaded and sold by someone who didn't hold the copyright. The fact that it just happened to be Orwell books and especially 1984 was a real reminder that life is rich with irony.

http://www.nytimes.com/2009/07/18/techn ... mazon.html

[artisticsolution]

It's a lot easier to make and distribute a copy of an ebook. today I can store a thousand works that some future eejit might condemn as subversive. And if he (it usually is a 'he') tries to wipe them off the 'net, i'll just copy and redistribute, and so will thousands of other people who give a damn.
So i reckon obliterating literature will get harder...

Hi Thundril,

I hope you are right, but the pessimistic side of me kinda agrees to what John implies in his last post. I believe they (the people who set up/develop out technology could program our devices to be tamper resistant and be able to do what they wanted from a remote location thus rendering our ability to use technology for our own purposes futile.

I think the 'control' issue some people have...especially with the increased population and fear of "chaos"....will become stronger and more condoned by society. I think the thought "we must not allow freedom of speech, or posting pics to 'facebook' type entities, or in general...going against anything the rich and powerful deem "necessary" to an 'orderly civilization'...will be propagandized until the masses are brainwashed to accept the axiom. Hell...we already are accepting of notions which take away more and more of our freedom every day..

[Kayla]

And if he (it usually is a 'he') tries to wipe them off the 'net, i'll just copy and redistribute, and so will thousands of other people who give a damn.

i dont think desire for censorship is gender specific

at least in my neck of the woods when someone is offended by some book in a school library that someone is invariably a shrill bitch

and earlier this year the school firewall stopped working and some students were able to access porn then a gaggle of angry parents showed up to yell at the principal and most of them were mad mothers

[bobevenson]

The problem is that there isn't enough book burning (the Koran) and flag burning (the American flag) to suit me.

[Arising_uk]

Don't forget the Bible and your 'prophecy'.

[bobevenson]

Don't forget the Bible and your 'prophecy'.

There's not a fucking object in this universe you shouldn't be able to burn if it's your property. I invite you to buy Ouzo @ $74.95 and burn it to a crisp.

[chaz wyman]

I just read this thread created by marjoramblues this morning...

viewtopic.php?f=15&p=107607#p107607

She/he said, "Yes, Chaz, and it seems to get stanger and stranger by the day - to buy a real book. I look at others on my shelves, sitting there, yellowing."

This got me to thinking of the future in a "what if" type of way....I allowed my mind to drift to a place in between the past and the future based to come to a fantasy of what might happen to books and authors in a future scenario based on human behavior of the past. Seeing as human nature is probably not going to change, it seems to me that this new idea of changing over to electronic books instead of hard copies might make it easier in the future to effectively "ban books."

I believe it is probable that hard copies of books will be a thing of the past as people or libraries will have no need to store millions of copies of old books and instead just filing them all in an electronic fashion. Sure...some really rare old valuable books will be "saved" under glass...but the majority of books will probably be destroyed and then listed in huge reference data base....at least in the near future.

But then what about farther into the future...when a new age of crazy book burning mentality rears it's ugly head again? How easy it would be to burn all the "offensive" books by just a touch of a button? How easy would it be to erase the past and silence a generation's voice or any controversial idea for that matter.

I guess I am a little sensitive as to the direction humanity seems to be taking recently. I see much more support for banning ideas and it worries me. The thing that worries me most is the popularity of the idea we must ban certain things. For example, Yesterday...I read a story about a woman being banned from facebook for posting pictures of her deformed newborn who only was able to live for 8 hours because of his birth defect. When I mention this to my husband and mother in law, they said, "Good...I agree she should be banned...it is weird to post a picture of a deformed dead baby." This blew me away! I argue that she had just as much right to post her newborn as thousands of other women post their newborns pics. And as for others being affected by the "hideousness"...well...we see worse than that everyday when we turn on our TV. Was the movie the Elephant man banned so that no one should have to look upon deformity? No...and neither should a woman be banned just for wishing to post a pic on facebook.

Anyway, I have always been shy of using facebook...as I did not like the control it had on people's lives...it was like "big brother" to me....but now...that they set out to ban certain users because they wish to post a picture in memory of their loved one who passed away...facebook can certainly shove it. Only now...in addition to not using their services and just looking the other way...I will mention my disdain for them every time someone speaks their name. I know it may not do much...but who knows...if they keep controlling the public as they do...there may come a times where they step on everyone's toes....but I digress...where was I again.... oh yeah...book banning not FACEbook banning ... OMG! I'm one of them!!!

I really do not think that this is the case. The preservation of books in the 20thC came close to a dangerous precendent as the advent of acid paper made from pulp limited new books to a very short life. Even with the greatest care most books made after 1930 have crumbled. By the time we reached the 1970s paperback were on a 15 year life, and making books from acid free paper was at an all time low.
This seems paradoxical but my version of Origin of Species reprinted in 1980 is now so faded and yellow as to be barely readable, whilst my copy of The Descent of Man which is over 110 years old is still stiff, strong and white.

However, now I have access to so many books that are endlessly and completely accurately copyable and sharable that it is hard to see how these could ever suffer from the book burning morons that we could face in the future.
In a small CD I can now store every surviving piece of ancient Greek literature (Thesaurus Lingua Greci), and resources such as the Gutenberg Project and the International Library of Liberty include masses of free data - so much so that it would be impossible for any tyrant to suppress this data.
So far from making it easier to ban books - I simply cannot imagine how one would begin to do this. You can hide a CD so much more easily than a block of paper, and a DVD can store thousands of books that would take up a very large warehouse.

[chaz wyman]

It's a lot easier to make and distribute a copy of an ebook. today I can store a thousand works that some future eejit might condemn as subversive. And if he (it usually is a 'he') tries to wipe them off the 'net, i'll just copy and redistribute, and so will thousands of other people who give a damn.
So i reckon obliterating literature will get harder...

Agreed.

For example the Communist Manifesto by Marx and Engles, is between 50k - 100k large. The Kindle file is 71k
http://www.gutenberg.org/ebooks/61

If a standard DVD contains 4 Gbytes of storage, that is 4,292,967,296bytes.
Which means you can get 4,292,967,296/(1024*71) = 59,047 books the same size as the Communist Manifesto on a single DVD which costs a quid. Potentiall every piece of seditious literate ever printed on one DVD.
How easy would it be to foil a book burning dictator?

The big danger is that people will look elsewhere for information and the sort of moronic shit that most Newspages on the Internet spew out, full of celebrity rubbish are controlling what people see and set the agenda on what is supposedly important.
Just check out Yahoo! front-page today and what do you see?

A Triumphant announcement of another indiscriminate summery execution of yet another 'so-called' terrorist with the inevitable and unsupported, catch phrase "links with Al Quaeda"

The next story - an indignant "terror group bounty on US leaders" - without irony!!! Well surprise, surprise. World leaders who flout international law and execute people without trial gat fatwahs on their heads? - no shit?

Oh wait - stop press Iceland has its own Loch Ness monster - whoopdedoo.
Who decides what is news?

[chaz wyman]

It's a lot easier to make and distribute a copy of an ebook. today I can store a thousand works that some future eejit might condemn as subversive. And if he (it usually is a 'he') tries to wipe them off the 'net, i'll just copy and redistribute, and so will thousands of other people who give a damn.
So i reckon obliterating literature will get harder...

Hi Thundril,

I hope you are right, but the pessimistic side of me kinda agrees to what John implies in his last post. I believe they (the people who set up/develop out technology could program our devices to be tamper resistant and be able to do what they wanted from a remote location thus rendering our ability to use technology for our own purposes futile.

No way - just pull the plug on the Internet - and pass the DVD.
I remember computers when there was no Internet.
Guess what - you can live without it.

I think the 'control' issue some people have...especially with the increased population and fear of "chaos"....will become stronger and more condoned by society. I think the thought "we must not allow freedom of speech, or posting pics to 'facebook' type entities, or in general...going against anything the rich and powerful deem "necessary" to an 'orderly civilization'...will be propagandized until the masses are brainwashed to accept the axiom. Hell...we already are accepting of notions which take away more and more of our freedom every day..

The brainwashing is NOW. Check out the news on Yahoo! - hardly balanced.

[lennartack]

It's a lot easier to make and distribute a copy of an ebook. today I can store a thousand works that some future eejit might condemn as subversive. And if he (it usually is a 'he') tries to wipe them off the 'net, i'll just copy and redistribute, and so will thousands of other people who give a damn.
So i reckon obliterating literature will get harder...

Since this post is about the future, you may not be right. If publishers win the DRM battle and technology companies (Apple, Amazon) succeed in ultimately controlling their users electronic devices - which is already happening - artisticsolution's fears become very realistic.

It is therefore a good idea to promote open formats and software, and stay out of the way of communication platforms that are controlled by single entities. Google and Facebook are threats to our freedom!

[lennartack]

Oh, if you're unfamiliar with DRM, check out http://www.defectivebydesign.org/what_is_drm.

If you buy an ebook it usually has DRM, meaning you cannot copy or redistribute it, and it is only readable on the device you bought it.