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

201–210 of 686 posts

Re: Pandora says laboratory-made diamonds are forever

#201

Post by KennethPT »

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?

Alternate view: Almost everything in life is ridiculous when you view it with cold logic. It's utterly ridiculous to put golden balls on a fake tree in your house every year, but due to societal constraints most people in Western societies do it.

Your SO probably doesn't want a logical gift, she wants something sentimental that makes her feel that you care about her. For some people, that's an expensive rock with no utility, for others it might be something different. But applying logic to what's ultimately an emotional, illogical affair isn't always productive.

Re: Pandora says laboratory-made diamonds are forever

#202

Post by user-the-name »

coward76 wrote: post #145
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…

Would you rather buy a Banksy NFT Or JPG of a Banksy they are the same image at a fraction of the cost?

Given that NFTs are a scam that only exist to make fraudsters rich while helping pollute the planet, I would take the JPG every hour of every day.

Re: Pandora says laboratory-made diamonds are forever

#204

Post by frockington1 »

tom_mellior wrote: post #140
simonh wrote: post #71

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If the best option available to people was diamond mining, by taking that away from them we’re by definition pushing them into an even worse option. That’s a big problem I have with a lot of the do-good commentary on developing world labour. Taking away options from people, even bad ones from our point of view, isn’t necessarily doing them any favours. None of these peoples options are going to look good to us. Actua…

> Actually helping these people means improving their existing options, or giving them new better ones. Yes. A basic income for which one doesn't need to go into the diamond mines, for example.

How do you implement UBI without any centralized government and in some cases a functioning currency?

Re: Pandora says laboratory-made diamonds are forever

#205

Post by slightwinder »

tom_mellior wrote: post #139
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…

> our teacher asked all of the women Sounds like a pretty sexist thing to do. The same question can be asked without putting women on the spot. "If you were to buy a diamond, what would you rather choose?"

Its more the marketing that is sexist. Marketing for Jewelry (and especially diamonds) usually aims at woman, not men. Men more likely would choose the cost-saving option, because for them there is not much awarness around the pricing of such meaningless "decoration". And this would kinda sabotage the purpose of the question.

Re: Pandora says laboratory-made diamonds are forever

#206

Post by gspr »

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?

I find it strange how many people seem to be able to separate a tradition from physical items traditionally involved in that tradition.

Re: Pandora says laboratory-made diamonds are forever

#207

Post by notyourday »

Kalium wrote: post #185
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 find it helps to remember that diamonds are a status symbol and a form of conspicuous consumption. People often want as much of that expensive, visible status and commitment signal as they can get. Part of the significance of the gesture is the level of painful expense involved. So making the item much cheaper also cheapens the gesture.

> Part of the significance of the gesture is the level of painful expense involved. So making the item much cheaper also cheapens the gesture.

Call it what it is: diamonds are a down payment from a man to a woman for access to sex. The higher the price, the higher the value he assigns to it.

Re: Pandora says laboratory-made diamonds are forever

#208

Post by throwaway0a5e »

Nursie wrote: post #123
qw wrote: post #104

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's mostly about the emotional attachment. If you find two identical pens, and one of them was used by a famous writer, you would expect a price difference. There is no difference in the quality of those pens. They both work the same, and using the writer's pen will not make you a better writer by itself. I personally would not buy a natural diamond because of the ethical issues, but I do understand the students who…

That's a good point, the difference doesn't have to be in the item itself, BUT - Does anyone, other than geologists of course, really care about the back-story of the diamond, how it was created and how it was mined? Or are they just hanging on to an idea that some of them are "real" and some "not real" for the purposes of social signalling? If the latter, I would consider this much more changeable over time.

I think the white collar internet kind of distorts the picture because it tends to heavily reward things that signal compliance with rule of law.

There are a lot of people who would consider a car, diamond, piece of art, etc that has "a decently long chain of people had to stick their neck out doing criminal things" in its provenance to be a more interesting than an equivalent "produced in a high tech factory".

I think even with synthetic diamonds being 100% on par in every way there will still be a market for ethically and legally gray diamonds because people want to know they're buying something that someone toiled and/or took risks for.

I'd say price will probably be the determining factor but luxury status symbol markets don't work that way.

Re: Pandora says laboratory-made diamonds are forever

#209

Post by slightwinder »

raverbashing wrote: post #167
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…

He should have explained about DeBeers. That would have brought the number of raised hands down. The ice analogy is a bit faulty because no one is eating their diamonds and the impurities are technically advantageous (though most people want the shiny "perfect" diamond which are much easier to come about artificially).

Aren't the impurities which make them shiny? Or is this also just marketing?

Re: Pandora says laboratory-made diamonds are forever

#210

Post by Kalium »

notyourday wrote: post #207
Kalium wrote: post #185

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I find it helps to remember that diamonds are a status symbol and a form of conspicuous consumption. People often want as much of that expensive, visible status and commitment signal as they can get. Part of the significance of the gesture is the level of painful expense involved. So making the item much cheaper also cheapens the gesture.

> Part of the significance of the gesture is the level of painful expense involved. So making the item much cheaper also cheapens the gesture. Call it what it is: diamonds are a down payment from a man to a woman for access to sex. The higher the price, the higher the value he assigns to it.

Nope. Nope nope nope nope.
Post reply on HN