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

Lab-grown diamonds threaten viability of the real gems

scmp.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

121–130 of 314 posts

Re: Lab-grown diamonds threaten viability of the real gems

#121

Post by strictnein »

3pt14159 wrote: post #29
Jedd wrote: post #23

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Neal Stephenson has a book that assumes such an advance -- it's not a key component of the story, but definitely features large in the title : The Diamond Age.

That’s my favourite book of his, but I’ve stopped recommending it to non-programmers because I think much of it’s magic is knowing how much of it is actually possible in the future.

Similarly, his book Cryptonomicon is quite long and likely would only hold ones interest if they had an interest in Cryptography.

Re: Lab-grown diamonds threaten viability of the real gems

#122

Post by speby »

This is great. I've heard of lab-grown diamonds for over 10 years now (and they've been making them longer than that). If the diamond market gets shook up over time, which I believe it really should, I hope the engagement ring market also gets a little shook up, which would be good too. It might encourage people to branch out a bit and look at other interesting and cool gems, like emerald, ruby, sapphire, and many others. The whole De Beers "Diamonds are forever" advertising from the mid-1900s is all bullshit anyways and yet managed to successfully brainwash generations of people into buying diamonds for their engagement rings. It wasn't always that way!

Re: Lab-grown diamonds threaten viability of the real gems

#123

Post by nailer »

cirgue wrote: post #106
nailer wrote: post #81

Article is unahamedly biased and provably incorrect: > De Beers fights fake No. De Beers is fighting man made diamonds. They are no less real than mined diamonds. > De Beers to invest tens of millions of dollars on methods to identify the man-made stones that look exactly like the real thing. Man made diamonds are the real thing.

> Man made diamonds are the real thing. Not to people who want mined diamonds. They're the real thing to you if you don't care about provenience. Not everyone feels that way.

They might not be desirable to people who prefer mined diamonds, but a diamond is a diamond.

I care about provenance - I find mined diamonds less desirable - but I still have to acknowledge that mined diamonds are in fact diamonds.

Re: Lab-grown diamonds threaten viability of the real gems

#126

Post by icebraining »

Jedd wrote: post #53
3pt14159 wrote: post #29

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That’s my favourite book of his, but I’ve stopped recommending it to non-programmers because I think much of it’s magic is knowing how much of it is actually possible in the future.

Possibly a key indicator of a quality SF idea / author -- how much closer we are to their universe a decade or two later. I've loved everything Neal's written, though I may begrudgingly agree with various critics that suggest he really doesn't do endings very well (REAMDE and Anathem are much, much better on this front). I've tried recommending various books of his to different friends, and I've concluded that I have…

Possibly a key indicator of a quality SF idea / author -- how much closer we are to their universe a decade or two later.

I wholeheartedly disagree. As the great (and unfortunately late) Ursula Le Guin wrote, I write science fiction, and science fiction isn't about the future. I don't know any more about the future than you do, and very likely less.[1]

Predictions are cute and all, and I enjoy reading them, but SF certainly can't be judged by how predictive it is.

[1] http://theliterarylink.com/leguinintro.html

Re: Lab-grown diamonds threaten viability of the real gems

#128

Post by sizzzzlerz »

SomeHacker44 wrote: post #97

I just don't get it. Who cares what the source of a diamond is? Isn't the point of a diamond its beauty in the eye of the beholder? If I had a big diamond I would definitely want the cheapest one possible with a visual aesthetic I like. Fortunately, my wife and I don't like diamonds and we have purple sapphires in our wedding bands.

My wife and I did a similar thing, not even bothering with precious stones but designing rings that featured some stunning turquoise set in white gold. Non-traditional? You bet, but neithor of us gave a fuck and we love them. Plus, we didn't go into debt to pay for them, using that money to entertain our guests.

Re: Lab-grown diamonds threaten viability of the real gems

#129

Post by saalweachter »

kbutler wrote: post #39
notahacker wrote: post #28

Earlier quoted context omitted.

In that respect it's the same as any other collectible or antique that can be reliably replicated in slightly better condition and with slightly less irregularity than the highly prized "mint condition" originals made by the most skilled artisans... (Less so for industrial uses, or for inserts into the average person's engagement rings where it's the thought and style rather than the provenance that counts)

Photorealism was the ultimate goal of artists, until that became easy.

Well, there was really a bifurcation in art.

Painting and drawing went for various forms of stylized representation, because competing against photographs doesn't interest most people.

But you also had a new field of photography, where the focus is now composition. There is a marked difference between the photographs I take and the photographs a skilled photographer takes, even if both are realistic depictions of a scene, and the difference is, sometimes, art.

Post reply on HN