3 ms·

> Send the same sample to a group of vehicle engineers or surgeons or athletes and they won't be willing to pay that price. But this is true of everything. Val

> Send the same sample to a group of vehicle engineers or surgeons or athletes and they won't be willing to pay that price. But this is true of everything. Value is decided by participants in the relevant market, not by some random people who aren't part of that market and who don't know what they're looking at. The market for gold values it at around $1900/ounce, but if you took an ounce of gold to some uncontacted indigenous tribe, you would not get market value for it.

moron4hire 6y ago
Yes, it is true of everything, and it debunks the labor theory of value. Curation, being a labor process, does not add value to anything.
- beervirus 6y ago
  There are plenty of reasons that the labor theory of value is wrong. The fact that different people value things differently isn't really one of them.
- claudiawerner 6y ago
  If curation did not add value, the market would not demand it, and soon enough the curators would realize their business is not profitable and stop doing it. Curation happening consistently and over a long period of time is a sign that it does add value.
- jcims 6y ago
  Your reconstruction of intent from my words is putting you in a very different place from where I am. Curation - I provided the definition above because you seem to be focused on the collection part of curation. There is more to it than that. You cannot 'curate' these samples on Earth because they don't exist on earth. Value - I'm using this term in the sense of 'what would someone pay for these'? I'm using it much the same way that art is valued or classic cars are valued for auction, not the internal mysteries of motivation or the commoditized value of a good like cold rolled steel or corn. In this case, like art, the provenance, authenticity and care of the instance is generally considered essential and therefore why the 'curation' does actually have a meaningful role in the value (at least by virtue of not destroying it along the way).

moron4hire 6y ago

Yes, it is true of everything, and it debunks the labor theory of value. Curation, being a labor process, does not add value to anything.

beervirus 6y ago
There are plenty of reasons that the labor theory of value is wrong. The fact that different people value things differently isn't really one of them.
claudiawerner 6y ago
If curation did not add value, the market would not demand it, and soon enough the curators would realize their business is not profitable and stop doing it. Curation happening consistently and over a long period of time is a sign that it does add value.
jcims 6y ago
Your reconstruction of intent from my words is putting you in a very different place from where I am. Curation - I provided the definition above because you seem to be focused on the collection part of curation. There is more to it than that. You cannot 'curate' these samples on Earth because they don't exist on earth. Value - I'm using this term in the sense of 'what would someone pay for these'? I'm using it much the same way that art is valued or classic cars are valued for auction, not the internal mysteries of motivation or the commoditized value of a good like cold rolled steel or corn. In this case, like art, the provenance, authenticity and care of the instance is generally considered essential and therefore why the 'curation' does actually have a meaningful role in the value (at least by virtue of not destroying it along the way).