Diamonds Are Bullshit • Hacker News Board

Re: Diamonds Are Bullshit

#291

Post by charlieflowers » Wed, Mar 20, 2013, 1:56 AM UTC

bradleyland wrote: post #279

eli wrote: post #264

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I remember reading this very good Wired article [1] ( "Armed with inexpensive, mass-produced gems, two startups are launching an assault on the De Beers cartel. Next up: the computing industry." ) and assuming we were on the verge of a major disruption. But that was 10 years ago. Anyone know why it didn't quite work out that way? [1] http://www.wired.com/wired/archive/11.09/diamond.html

The psychology of diamonds only works if you pay a lot for the stone. I would posit that synthetic diamonds fail for the same reasons that knock-offs like cubic zirconiums fail. They don't deliver on the promise of the advertising. The advertising promises that your love can only be shown by spending a lot of money on this specific thing with these specific set of arbitrary selected attributes. E.g., it must come fro…

It's like believing in the Tooth Fairy or the Easter Bunny, but for adults.

What other manufactured fairy tales have huge quantities of humans swallowed hook line and sinker?

Re: Diamonds Are Bullshit

#292

Post by rayiner » Wed, Mar 20, 2013, 1:59 AM UTC

drivebyacct2 wrote: post #290

rayiner wrote: post #200

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Its' really hard to live life stepping on eggshells worrying about injustices to other people. At the end of the day, I bet most people on this thread drive, and there is very little else that humans do that does more violence to the environment and to other humans than the use of fossil fuels. It goes far beyond that. If you're an American, your comfortable life exists because of the American government's willingnes…

The US does bad things so I can justify supporting child exploitation? Adoption is a bad choice for smart parents? Man, are you for real?

1) I can guarantee you oil extraction from places like Nigeria isn't free of child exploitation, but I bet you continue to make the lifestyle choice of driving.

2) I didn't say adoption is bad for smart parents I said its not equivalent to having children of your own for smart parents. There aren't exactly a ton of children of high IQ couples in the adoption market. My bother in law is adopted and he is a doll and adoption is great. But it's not completely equivalent to having your own kids.

Re: Diamonds Are Bullshit

#293

Post by jmspring » Wed, Mar 20, 2013, 2:01 AM UTC

dclowd9901 wrote: post #249

wutbrodo wrote: post #223

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I doubt the point is to demonstrate financial security: Spending three months' salary on a single ring would seem to indicate financial irresponsibility more than financial security (unless it's like a rebate and you sell the ring once you're married? /s). I'm inclined to agree that you're right about the price being the point. I think it has more to do with "You're worth it to me". I still think it's utter bollocks.

Diamonds aren't popular because they have any real value. No one actually believes they do. They cost a lot and are an easily worn, thus making them perfect for their favorite hobby: making other women feel inadequate. Even women who are positively liberal on such matters are drawn to the idea of forcing their husbands to show such monetary devotion. The issue here isn't the scarcity of diamonds. It's the scarcity if…

The comment "making other women feel inadequate" is chauvinistic and generalizing...but at least you acknowledge it...

My wife and I eschewed engagement rings or expensive wedding rings (her's was a little pricey, but from an artisan jeweler, but not a lot of bling), instead we opted for spending the money on property (not our main residence). At the least, despite ups and downs here in the states, it has held it's value.

Charities or other personal investments really are a better option than the bling. That said, some people like the material status comparison.

Re: Diamonds Are Bullshit

#294

Post by drivebyacct2 » Wed, Mar 20, 2013, 2:03 AM UTC

rayiner wrote: post #292

drivebyacct2 wrote: post #290

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The US does bad things so I can justify supporting child exploitation? Adoption is a bad choice for smart parents? Man, are you for real?

1) I can guarantee you oil extraction from places like Nigeria isn't free of child exploitation, but I bet you continue to make the lifestyle choice of driving. 2) I didn't say adoption is bad for smart parents I said its not equivalent to having children of your own for smart parents. There aren't exactly a ton of children of high IQ couples in the adoption market. My bother in law is adopted and he is a doll and ad…

1) That is very obviously and intentionally not a response to what I asked. I barely, barely drive as it is. I commute to work, I'm within biking distance of my grocery store. Besides, transportation is sort of essential in the United States to commute and buy food. A diamond has none of that utility. None at all. The fact that you compare them, use it to justify any sort of exploitation is incredible.

2) I should've let it go, I have no desire to argue to have an irrelevant discussion about adoption that already offends my sensibilities.

Re: Diamonds Are Bullshit

#295

Post by mattstreet » Wed, Mar 20, 2013, 2:05 AM UTC

rayiner wrote: post #133

clicks wrote: post #123

Earlier quoted context omitted.

1) It demonstrates the man's ability to provide; 2) It demonstrates the man's willingness to forgo the other things he could buy with the money for a gift for her that does not directly benefit him in any way; and 3) It demonstrates to the woman's peers her husband's social standing. To play devil's advocate here: If you substitute 'ring' with 'a $3k donation to redcross' you could still potentially qualify all of th…

It doesn't qualify (3), which is a very important one. I've got a daughter. She's only 4 months old, but I've had occasion to think a bit about this. I would not want her to marry someone who wasn't willing to give her a ring? Why? Reasons (1) and (2) I mentioned, sure, but also reason (3). It is the mark of a sensible man that he cares what other people think about him. People who buck social conventions sometimes b…

That is so fucking sad. Aren't there literally hundreds of traits more important in a husband than buying a ring?

Tell me this statement is satire: "Do I want my daughter to be with a man that is willing to create headwinds for himself out of foolish principles and refusal to conform? All else being equal, no"

Re: Diamonds Are Bullshit

#296

Post by rayiner » Wed, Mar 20, 2013, 2:07 AM UTC

YZF wrote: post #273

rayiner wrote: post #259

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Have you ever been pregnant or had a child? It's 9 months of misery punctuated by 12 hours of stress and agony, relieved only by the epidural. That's followed by weeks of pain and bleeding, and major bodily changes of various degrees of permanence (stretched out abdominal muscles, stretched out hips). Oh, and post-partum depression. And that's if you're lucky. Childbirth can last way longer than 12 hours, it can invo…

My wife really enjoyed the experience. We had a home birth. No epidural. Two kids. It is a life changing experience for both wife and husband. It's part of life. Life isn't a video game. It's not a synthetic experience. Some people may prefer to be a brain in a jar hooked to some wires but then where would they put the diamond ring? :-)

My wife is a zealot in the anti home birth holy war so I'm going to just express my happiness that yours found it enjoyable and slowly walk away from the keyboard.

Re: Diamonds Are Bullshit

#297

Post by bilbo0s » Wed, Mar 20, 2013, 2:10 AM UTC

dclowd9901 wrote: post #249

wutbrodo wrote: post #223

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I doubt the point is to demonstrate financial security: Spending three months' salary on a single ring would seem to indicate financial irresponsibility more than financial security (unless it's like a rebate and you sell the ring once you're married? /s). I'm inclined to agree that you're right about the price being the point. I think it has more to do with "You're worth it to me". I still think it's utter bollocks.

Diamonds aren't popular because they have any real value. No one actually believes they do. They cost a lot and are an easily worn, thus making them perfect for their favorite hobby: making other women feel inadequate. Even women who are positively liberal on such matters are drawn to the idea of forcing their husbands to show such monetary devotion. The issue here isn't the scarcity of diamonds. It's the scarcity if…

There are a great many couples in my social circle who eschewed the diamond ring. They have meaningful, and expensive alternative rings, but not diamonds. We don't have diamonds either.

My only point is that not ALL women are about making other women feel inadequate. Or showing off their diamonds. Many are actually just as disgusted as men are about it. And they prefer men who have that conscious, and will put some thought into an alternative.

However... Your last suggestion, I grant you, has merit.

Re: Diamonds Are Bullshit

#298

Post by Helianthus » Wed, Mar 20, 2013, 2:10 AM UTC

manicdee wrote: post #289

Helianthus wrote: post #254

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>Charities, if you're listening, here's an idea: create uniquely identified jewelry (bracelets, necklaces) marketed as devotional donations This is actually a very interesting idea. It has I guess a few complications--are we comfortable with making generosity a commodity? I'm not at all, actually--but at the very least it would be preferable to diamond rings.

It's been done: Pink products to support breast cancer research, PRODUCT (RED) for combating AIDS in Africa.

Eh, point. And witness discomfort about making generosity a commodity.

Re: Diamonds Are Bullshit

#299

Post by g8oz » Wed, Mar 20, 2013, 2:10 AM UTC

mikeash wrote: post #253

Zimahl wrote: post #199

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You are saying that a TV that probably costs to make at least a portion of that $2000 is worth less than a purse that can be knocked off to look EXACTLY THE SAME but cost 2 orders of magnitude less are the same? I won't bother arguing the value of a TV. I think there are many that can argue the value of a designer purse.

We're not talking about worth. The exact words were, "more functional". A purse is obviously more functional than a TV.

It could be argued that killing time is a function.

Re: Diamonds Are Bullshit

#300

Post by khuey » Wed, Mar 20, 2013, 2:11 AM UTC

lwat wrote: post #131

If it's good enough for Priscilla Zuckerberg (née Chan) it should be good enough for anyone: A ruby engagement ring! http://www.yourengagement101.com/files/2012/05/mark-zuckerbe...

She didn't change her name.