The bamboo slips recovered from a tomb at Guodian in 1993, dated to around 300 BCE, are the earliest witnesses to any part of this text, and they contain a version of chapter nineteen that differs from the received one at exactly its most controversial point.
In the received text the second pair of terms to be cut off and discarded is benevolence and rightness, the central pair of Confucian virtue. In the Guodian version those terms are not the target. Different terms stand in their place, and the effect is that the chapter's attack falls on artifice and deceit rather than on the Confucian virtues.
The implications are large and are actively argued. If the Guodian reading is earlier, then the sharpest anti-Confucian line in the Tao Te Ching is not original to it, and the picture of the book as a rival school's polemic against Confucianism needs revising toward something more like a shared body of material that later hands sharpened into rivalry. If instead the Guodian text is a local or softened version, the received reading may stand.
Neither conclusion is established, and both are held by serious scholars. What is not in dispute is the physical evidence: the slips exist, they are dated, and the words on them differ.
The atlas records the difference rather than picking. It is the clearest single case of why the chapter divisions and the wording of this text are marked as debated throughout these rows.