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

Diamonds Suck

diamondssuck.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

11–20 of 171 posts

Re: Diamonds Suck

#11

Post by lovepronmostly »

exitb wrote: post #2

To an engineer's eye this might make sense, but the significant cost of a diamond is actually the very point of buying it. And it's hardly an odd thing - the history of human civilisation is littered with examples of spending for the sole purpose of being able parade the purchase.

That's true. Just like people by Gucci, LV, D&G etc. I was in a Prada store once and they were selling an acrylic keychain for $800. There was nothing making the chain better than any other chain except you could show off your Prada chain and I guess hope other people would know you had money to blow.

Re: Diamonds Suck

#12

Post by semanticc »

The [artificial] scarcity and [unjustifiably] high price are properties of almost all luxury goods. And those are exactly what makes them (watches, handbags, diamonds etc.) so desirable to many.

I fully agree that spending two months' gross salary on an engagement ring is way too much though, and I would never ever get into debt for that. But, similarly as I enjoy wearing a relatively useless but expensive watch daily, I didn't mind dropping approx. 2/3 of a month's net salary on my fiancé's diamond engagement ring, which she got to choose and now cherishes and admires every day.

Re: Diamonds Suck

#13

Post by debok »

RandomLensman wrote: post #4

Before diamonds were the go-to for engagement rings, color stones like ruby, sapphire, and emerald were the thing. So why should it be mossianite and not going back to other gem stones?

My wife likes the color blue. So the rocks on the engagement ring I got her has a mix of Topaz and Sapphire.

Also, it only cost about 25% of my salary at that time. Spending 200% monthly salary on a ring makes absolutely no sense.

Re: Diamonds Suck

#14

Post by pierat »

I got my partner a platinum ring with a YAG stone grown and cut to my speficiations. I also designed the ring, and had it made.

The YAG stone is bright blue-green, and just as shiny as diamonds.

And on the upside, the local jewewer made it from the 3d printed wax cast, and the stone was grown by scientists.

No slave labor or child labor was used in any way.

Re: Diamonds Suck

#15

Post by aurizon »

This is a socially engineered marketing racket. The earth diamond peddlers came out with a laser mark/blemish visible under a microscope to create a non fakeable brand for earth diamonds and are trying to hold those as a premium 'natural' product. A desperate rear guard action to preserve their racket - that is what it is, - a racket https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Racketeering

Re: Diamonds Suck

#16

Post by vasdae »

Imagine wanting to marry someone and buying a ring with a rock that pretends to be a diamond but is worth <10% of what a diamond costs.

Re: Diamonds Suck

#17

Post by pierat »

debok wrote: post #13
RandomLensman wrote: post #4

Before diamonds were the go-to for engagement rings, color stones like ruby, sapphire, and emerald were the thing. So why should it be mossianite and not going back to other gem stones?

My wife likes the color blue. So the rocks on the engagement ring I got her has a mix of Topaz and Sapphire. Also, it only cost about 25% of my salary at that time. Spending 200% monthly salary on a ring makes absolutely no sense.

Check out this company https://www.stagandfinch.com/lab-gems

And this is my favorite https://www.stagandfinch.com/product-page/paraiba-teal-yag-2. ... And is what what my partner's stone is.

Re: Diamonds Suck

#18

Post by weevil »

vasdae wrote: post #16

Imagine wanting to marry someone and buying a ring with a rock that pretends to be a diamond but is worth <10% of what a diamond costs.

Interesting that you (presumably) read the article and came to this conclusion.

Re: Diamonds Suck

#19

Post by Mordisquitos »

exitb wrote: post #10
omnicognate wrote: post #3

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't think that's news to the author, but even on those terms it's not a great purchase to "parade" if its visually indistinguishable from something with a fraction of the price.

Some people buy expensive watches, even though there are visually indistinguishable clones on the market. I still don't think that a fake Rolex makes for a great gift. I don't really want to advocate for diamonds here. I hate that it's mined at the expense of human welfare. I just want to point out that this article is 17 years old and not much has changed since it was written. Maybe it's not a compelling take?

> I still don't think that a fake Rolex makes for a great gift.

Arguably moissanite is not analogous to a fake Rolex. Rather, it is analogous to an elegant and good quality watch of a non-luxury brand. To that extent, I think that a good Swatch, Seiko or Casio wristwatch can make for a great gift.

Re: Diamonds Suck

#20

Post by weevil »

My partner and I specifically avoided diamonds (and ultimately all gemstones) for our engagement rings. We went for unobtrusive silver rings, then shelled out for good quality gold wedding rings from a craftsperson we both knew. I think we spent about $1500 on rings in total and, can you believe it, our marriage has not fallen apart because we didn't spend thousands of dollars getting shiny rocks for our fingers.
Post reply on HN