Hacker News Reader

Comment by codezero | Hacker News Reader

Agreed, but I assume most of these were in terrible condition to start with. I'm surprised they don't mention it in their FAQ so I could be wrong.

As an example they have this to say about the 14th century samurai sword:

  While lovely, the blade has a number of micro-fractures that made it unsuitable,
  and potentially dangerous, as a collectible.

View on HN

The critical issue here is not something's value as a "collectible." We're not caddisfly larvae.

Sorry, I might be stupid, but I'm not sure what you're saying. What _is_ the critical issue? Generally destroying objects?

There is some spectrum between a usable item and complete refuse, it feels like most of the stuff being cut up is closer to refuse, but I could be very wrong.

Destroying objects that have historical value (which is distinct from collectible value).

As an exaggerated example, you wouldn't chop up a Dead Sea Scroll into tiny fragments just because it's useless as bedtime reading. The fact that collectors would be willing to buy very tiny pieces of dead sea scroll (perhaps collectively netting more than the sale of a single intact scroll) doesn't make it okay.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com