If we're talking about writing from ancient Sumeria, or another civilization in the distant past, than everything we can recover really is valuable. A text doesn't have to be another Epic of Gilgamesh for it to teach us a lot about societies we know relatively little about.

You have an implicit assumption that the benefit of learning information always justifies the effort and time spent on learning it. I don't think that's a given or true.

Not everything has to be a benefit.

For many of us it's not about some cost/benefit analysis, but passion and curiosity.

That's still following an objective perceived benefit: quenching a passion and satisfying curiosity.

It's following a passion, but hardly an "objectively perceived benefit".

Except in the sense that everything is a benefit (including shooting heroin, where the benefit is the high, and so on) where the term becomes meaningless. But even so, it still wouldn't be "objectively perceived". More like "subjectively pursued and felt".

> where the term becomes meaningless

Sure, you're welcome to just stop examining thoughts at the surface level and not dig deeper. Other people here seem content with that. I'm not.

Now you’re moving the goal posts. You argued that writings from the past are worthless; I pointed out that they have great historical value. Cost-benefit analysis is beside the point. But we’re both here writing comments in a Hacker News thread so the option value of our time can’t be all that high.

Hard disagree when it comes to any ancient text. For example, many of the oldest cuneiform tablets are simply accounting and receipts. They give a direct insight into what was considered valuable enough to keep track of back then. Likewise, marginalia and even doodles tell us a great deal about what some individuals were thinking about.

This is as interesting to me as any form of literature.

"Worthy" is a relative word. For historians, translating these tablets is incredibly worthy however mundane it is to the layperson.

A friend of mine, a historian, says that people only wrote down what was important to them at that time - and that was, more often than not, who owed them money.

Even if that is true, how do you know if something is worthy of being read without reading it? Isn’t the ability to write it off as unworthy worth the time to read it?

A sheep count on a 3000 year old clay tablet is cool enough to be heard