Stupidity like this only hurts the long-term goal of making printed books something only hobbyists are interested in (like vinyl records), but what's the solution? Data integrity regulation from governments? Or will the markets take care of it?
Man you worry about some weird stuff dude.
Your comment struck me as snarky and unfair and I have downvoted it and upvoted its parent.
The digital world is ephemeral.
The book-equivalent of source code is the collection of discarded drafts and working notes of the author. These, too, are often lost, but that has little to do with whether they are digital or not.
It's expensive to properly store and maintain physical copies of things like books. I understand that archivists have some trepidation replacing a known system of storing physical books with a relatively unfamiliar and untested system of storing digital goods. But the bugs are already being worked out; if you want to make sure something lasts, make it digital and make sure lots of others can get to it.
Per that last example, consider that the "Nooked" War and Peace could be considered a "great typo" someday sought after by collectors - except that, being ephemera, the digital copy will either be lost or copies unverifiable due to ease of replication.
I certainly appreciate the benefits of e-books. At the same time, physical presence carries a lot of meaning beyond just content. Alas for those notable books lost in a sea of bits...
So confrontational, geez.
The context of my statement was simply that I enjoy the physical nature of books. I was simply trying to express that if they were gone, or harder to come by than their digital brethren, I would be a little saddened.
Author can sign the text of the book, and publishers can sign the container. I don't know how future-proof this is (and it obviously isn't going to work for something like War and Peace), but it's something that can be done today.