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

Pandora says laboratory-made diamonds are forever

bbc.co.uk

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

111–120 of 686 posts

Re: Pandora says laboratory-made diamonds are forever

#111

Post by xenocratus »

joeblau wrote: post #65

Random diamond story! As a freshman in college, I took a geology class and our teacher asked all of the women in our class to raise their hand if they would rather have natural or human-made diamonds. Most of the women (over 80%) raised their hands for natural. The reasons they gave all seemed to tie back to branding and natural diamonds being “real.” Then our teacher gave another analogy. He asked if people would ra…

I think the question might be a bit misleading. "Would you rather have X?" isn't the same as "Would you rather your spouse buys you X?". I'd prefer having a natural diamond too, for the same reason I'd prefer having a piece of ember with an insect that was trapped there naturally millions of years ago as opposed to a man-made one that was produced last month. By no means would I buy a natural diamond or support the mining system behind it, but there's no denying that I'd find it more interesting and somehow awe-inspiring.

Re: Pandora says laboratory-made diamonds are forever

#112

Post by rakoo »

goldcd wrote: post #58
Nursie wrote: post #35

Good for them. It's literally the same material, and we can now use scientific and engineering advances to remove the need for people to toil and die underground to get them. Hopefully the process is more environmentally friendly too. They are real diamonds. I find it hi-goddamned-larious that the moment these became viable, the industry switched from "Diamond purity is the be-all and end-all and you must have the cl…

The flip side though, is that you're making diamond miners unemployed. I suspect if they had alternate employment opportunities available that were more pleasant/better-paying, they'd have already taken them. So losers are the poor folks digging in the ground and winners are the companies who've just built themselves a lab. Maybe a way out of this, would be price up the grown diamonds to include a charitable donation…

This argument is as old as time. There even was a satirical text on the matter 2 centuries ago (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fr%C3%A9d%C3%A9ric_Bastiat#Eco...: The Sun, being an infinite source of free light, is unfair competition to candlemakers and should be blocked to allow the economy to grow and people to make a wage.

Re: Pandora says laboratory-made diamonds are forever

#113

Post by tut-urut-utut »

cyberpunk wrote: post #3

Married members of HN, what did you do if you think diamonds are utterly ridiclious however due to societal constraints some kind of ring is required for your SO?

Not every society in the world requires a diamond on the wedding ring. In large parts of Europe, the wedding ring is just a golden ring, maybe a bit bigger or nicer, but doesn't cost an arm and a leg compared to other jewellery.

I always found the stories that middle-class people are expected to pay 20+K for the wedding ring quite hard to believe, but it may be it's true in some parts of the world.

Re: Pandora says laboratory-made diamonds are forever

#114

Post by yrgulation »

cyberpunk wrote: post #3

Married members of HN, what did you do if you think diamonds are utterly ridiclious however due to societal constraints some kind of ring is required for your SO?

I simply didn't care - bought a meteorite ring instead. Everyone is impressed as few know such a thing exists. I even tell them it's rarer than diamonds (I don't know that for a fact, but it makes a good story for the wow factor).

Re: Pandora says laboratory-made diamonds are forever

#115

Post by eru »

croo wrote: post #29
chrisseaton wrote: post #19

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> a gold or silver ring is acceptable As in not having a ring is 'unacceptable' somehow then?

Not op, but yes. Engagement traditionally is giving a ring to your desired future wife. I don't understand your point. Of course you can ignore tradition but then why marry in the first place?

> Of course you can ignore tradition but then why marry in the first place?

Taxation, adoption, power of attorney, inheritance taxes, etc.

Re: Pandora says laboratory-made diamonds are forever

#116

Post by JackFr »

sneak wrote: post #11
cyberpunk wrote: post #3

Married members of HN, what did you do if you think diamonds are utterly ridiclious however due to societal constraints some kind of ring is required for your SO?

Rings also fall under the category of utterly ridiculous. A marriage isn’t jewelry.

Along with being a visible symbol of my love and commitment to my wife, I also use my wedding ring to open beer bottles - so, you know, not utterly ridiculous.

Re: Pandora says laboratory-made diamonds are forever

#118

Post by eru »

alias_neo wrote: post #78
trapexit wrote: post #39

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is kind of a lazyweb question because the "why marriage?" question has been discussed many times before on HN. https://www.google.com/search?q=marriage+site%3Anews.ycombin... Beyond the social convention that "it's the thing to do" at a certain point in a relationship, some reasons are: - Marriage provides financial assurance for a spouse who will defer their career to raise children. - Some friends and family (…

So, although the question-asker is being downvoted, your response does actually cover interesting discussion topics, and to summarise, the answer could be that the systems and conventions need to change? - I believe in the UK (where I live) one has all of the legal and financial implications automatically when a relationship reaches a certain age (3 years I believe). Legally you would be treated the same way as if yo…

Yes, the UK is somewhat special here.

They also apply the same treatment to foreigners coming to the UK.

So if you've been living with your boyfriend for long enough, the UK will extend him a spousal visa without you having to get married.

Re: Pandora says laboratory-made diamonds are forever

#119

Post by chrisseaton »

aliyfarah wrote: post #96
joeblau wrote: post #65

Random diamond story! As a freshman in college, I took a geology class and our teacher asked all of the women in our class to raise their hand if they would rather have natural or human-made diamonds. Most of the women (over 80%) raised their hands for natural. The reasons they gave all seemed to tie back to branding and natural diamonds being “real.” Then our teacher gave another analogy. He asked if people would ra…

Thanks for the story, that was a very good analogy by your prof.

> that was a very good analogy by your prof.

Sounds like it wasn't because it didn't convince many people!

Re: Pandora says laboratory-made diamonds are forever

#120

Post by nailer »

Quick reminder of options for men looking to get married and looking to avoid getting exploited by De Beers:

1. Man made diamonds. Better clarity and color and larger gems for the same price. Or the same gem for a smaller price.

2. Second hand mined diamonds. Better jewelers, deceased estates, auction houses like Sotheby's and Christie's etc.

3. Other precious stones which are not diamonds.

4. Not buying a stone or a ring (eg if she doesn't take your surname and you don't wish to have traditional gender roles it would be unreasonable to expect a gem to be provided).

Post reply on HN