Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Diamonds Suck (2006)

diamondssuck.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

41–50 of 618 posts

Re: Diamonds Suck (2006)

#41

Post by emodendroket »

sametmax wrote: post #31

Seems like an american things really. In France, nobody would expect anyone to buy a certain kind of ring. As long as it's pretty, you can go for anything. Or no engagement ring. Some friends of mine don't even get wedding rings. And I just met a not married couple wearing rings just because they liked it. Our wedding ceremonies are also usually way cheaper and less show off that the ones your pop culture is selling…

It's a bit of a stretch to say that only diamond rings are acceptable, but also to say that they're unknown outside the United States.

Re: Diamonds Suck (2006)

#42

Post by riffraff »

m1aw wrote: post #15
err4nt wrote: post #8

After reading about Moissanite I went out and got a nice custom diamond ring. I've seen it in person and sometimes you CAN tell, because of the 'fire' its way more rainbowy than diamond, diamonds are 'whiter' looking. I'm not even opposed to CZ if it looks pretty, but I wanted to give her a diamond and gold, and anything else would have felt like a substitution.

This is what annoys me. The geek and idealist in me doesn't want to give her a diamond because it's not that valuable. Yet, I don't want to be cheap. I don't want her to feel like I don't value her enough.

try to convince her that a different gemstone (ruby, sapphire etc) is better. I tried and failed, but it might work.

Re: Diamonds Suck (2006)

#43

Post by Casseres »

beaner wrote: post #9

A diamond purchase is a type of proof-of-burn. It's a way to display how much you value the person by being willing to sacrifice a large part of your savings for them. It's not really about the stone itself, it's about the cost.

Then give a donation receipt for a charity that you both support for the cost of the diamond instead. At least that way the sacrificed money will support something you both believe in rather than the diamond industry.

Re: Diamonds Suck (2006)

#44

Post by Chris2048 »

beaner wrote: post #9

A diamond purchase is a type of proof-of-burn. It's a way to display how much you value the person by being willing to sacrifice a large part of your savings for them. It's not really about the stone itself, it's about the cost.

Does giving them something of actual value not prove the same? Do divorce laws not guarantee monetary sacrifice already?

My opinion is that this is proof of irrational attachment..

Re: Diamonds Suck (2006)

#45

Post by gkya »

thebiglebrewski wrote: post #14

Can anyone give me advice on how to convince my girlfriend of this though without her thinking I love her any less :)?

If my girlfriend thought that I loved her less because I didn't give her a diamond ring, I'd reconsider my relationship.

Re: Diamonds Suck (2006)

#46

Post by klodolph »

FilterSweep wrote: post #29
m1aw wrote: post #15

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is what annoys me. The geek and idealist in me doesn't want to give her a diamond because it's not that valuable. Yet, I don't want to be cheap. I don't want her to feel like I don't value her enough.

The argument given in the article is that you can spend significantly more on a setting and still come out spending less.

I thought the argument was that you could spend the same amount and get a bigger rock. Maybe I was injecting my own interpretation of things.

Re: Diamonds Suck (2006)

#48

Post by diamond1 »

"The big difference between moissanite and diamond is that moissanite can be manufactured reliably and efficiently in a laboratory."

Thats not true, diamonds can be manufactured reliably and efficiently in a laboratory as well. And its nearly impossible to tell the difference between natural and artificial ones. Only a very complicated lab test with a machine can tell the difference.

Re: Diamonds Suck (2006)

#49

Post by onion2k »

maaaats wrote: post #18

> Isn't it amazing (and scary) how brainwashed people are about the "value" of diamonds, even though they're not actually worth that much? I've never understood this argument. Aren't they worth what people are willing to pay?

Aren't they worth what people are willing to pay?

Yes, but only as a function of their scarcity. Diamonds aren't actually rare. They're only made rare by diamond companies hoarding them and releasing tiny numbers of stones in order to maintain a high price. You certainly wouldn't buy diamonds as an investment, just in case a diamond company dumped their stockpile on to the market and the price collapsed.

Re: Diamonds Suck (2006)

#50

Post by DanBC »

thebiglebrewski wrote: post #14

Can anyone give me advice on how to convince my girlfriend of this though without her thinking I love her any less :)?

A $2000 ring is cents per day for a long marriage.

66% of marriages survive 10 years. The ring would cost 50c per day.

Buy the ring, and spend less of coffee.

Post reply on HN