Writing specifically about my job is of course forbidden to a degree, which ought to come as no surprise, given that we - and thus I - deal entirely in as yet unpublished material. It is not the sort of thing that must be spoiler tagged or that will inspire a line of would be readers to congregate outside of a bookstore - provided such things still exist - for the better part of a day and night, but it is, nonetheless, a rule to which I have consented, having read and signed documentation declaring that, in exchange for employment and regular monetary compensation, I agree to follow certain rules, one of which being that I will not disclose information about our customers, or the contents of their publications.
Respecting that I will ask, not for comments in the box below, but merely for an internal discussion to such an extent as you are satisfied with, on the notion of sacrifice, the degree of consent necessary for such an act to be called such, if any at all; and further, for whom or what a sacrifice is made, to what god, what ideal, what principle, what progress, what end, be it religious or scientific in nature; and indeed, if there is any relevant difference between the two, regarding this.
In short, may one individual or a collection thereof justly call a thing a sacrifice - and further, may they justly carry out the act itself, by any name? - when it is not directly of themselves, and is of no harm by any effective means to themselves? If they may, then on what authority do they act, if not from consent by the party to be harmed?