In the article, it mentioned the concept of ‘Provenance.’ It is interesting how the same item can be understood in so many ways, which in turn affects its ownership and related history was understood. For example, there is still a debate going on about whether calligraphy was invented in China or Korea because there were historical items found in both countries that couldn’t verify their date of origin.

The ethics aspect of classical art and archeology is also concerning as access to archeological materials is a matter of local heritage that government would want to keep private until its own scholars develop research and understandings ready to be published. Archeological materials of economic or military value would be even more sensitive, as it will give the local government/country an advantage compared to the international communities. The authenticity of the data is also doubtable, as the data we can access now might already be filtered by the government, which only displays what they want people to see.

Furthermore, this article also made me realize how much investment in infrastructure is needed in order to maintain all the data and resources we are accessing today. A lot of information might be lost due to the difficulty of technical support and maintenance and lack of funding. The data and resources we can get access to today are also ‘filtered’ depending on if the monetary/educational value it could bring can cover the cost it takes to keep it.