Live data from Hacker News

Pandora says laboratory-made diamonds are forever

bbc.co.uk

281–290 of 686 posts

Re: Pandora says laboratory-made diamonds are forever

#281
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…

"Okay class, child labour, a few thousand poor people dead, terrorist groups starving hundreds of thousands, destroying schools and libraries. That is where diamonds come from. How many would still want a natural diamond because diamonds are forever?" The elephant in that lecture hall was probably the hypocrisy. I think if you still raise a hand after hearing all that, the issue isn't branding at all. It's narcissim,…

I personally fully agree, but unfortunately not everyone thinks as logically as you or I.

I talked about this with my wife recently, and even though she had a vague idea of the horrors that mined diamonds bring, she'd still continue to buy/want mined diamonds. She sees mined diamonds as more "real", and finds it difficult to believe that her diamonds in particular would be part of the problem - as if it somehow would only affect diamonds purchased in dodgy, back-room deals. She seems to think it's OK because "everyone else does it". No amount of discussion of verifiable facts seems to change that view; indeed, she got quite annoyed with me, and didn't want to discuss it any further.

A large part of the problem is conditioning, through both advertising and tradition. In the west, we are conditioned from an early age to believe that "diamonds are a girl's best friend", that women should accept nothing less that a "real" diamond, and that men should spend some silly multiple of their salary when buying such a diamond. Diamonds are synonymous with luxury.

What we really need is a big, sustained campaign against mined diamonds, really putting the horrors in the faces of potential customers, so they have to accept the damage mined diamonds cause,and accept that they are part of the problem. Such a campaign probably needs to be fronted by celebrities - inspirational figures that people will listen to.

I whole-heartedly applaud Pandora for making the first move here - hopefully this will help to break the stalemate and be the start of a much bigger movement.

Re: Pandora says laboratory-made diamonds are forever

#282
post #123

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

"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?" Yes of course. Everybody can buy a ring with a diamond, but if they sell you a story with it you can tell, it is even better :)

> Yes of course. Everybody can buy a ring with a diamond, but if they sell you a story with it you can tell, it is even better :)

A story about geology and how it was dug up? The same story as literally every other diamond wearer?

Re: Pandora says laboratory-made diamonds are forever

#283
post #6

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?

Just bought it and moved on. I'm happy that she's happy. I couldn't care less.

You are the ideal consumer. Hope you realize why it would be bad if everyone was like you.

Re: Pandora says laboratory-made diamonds are forever

#284
post #236
post #123

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

The people in these stories don’t buy diamond for their mechanical properties or bore tunnels, so everything surrounding the diamond itself is what matters. How it was mined, where it came from, which company sells it and how all of that is marketed to the world (not even really to the owner) is the value of all of this. It’s like sending a unicef postcard, what matters the most would be the effect on the receiver an…

> How it was mined, where it came from

I've never met anyone that cares about that at all, beyond 'conflict-free'.

Re: Pandora says laboratory-made diamonds are forever

#285

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> 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?

https://www.givedirectly.org/ gives a basic income to poor people. It's not universal.

Re: Pandora says laboratory-made diamonds are forever

#286
post #164

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The economics behind diamonds are better explained by an sociologist, not a geologist- the high cost and useless-ness of the gift are a feature not a bug! The burning of significant amount of wealth is a costly signal of commitment to the receiver. I heard from a friend who worked at a diamond company (and as such could purchase stones with significant discount to market price) that his fiancée had specifically rejec…

> The burning of significant amount of wealth is a costly signal of commitment to the receiver. So why not buy something practical and expensive? Like a house or a car?

For houses it's completely plausible that the motivation is for the asset to appreciate in value and even if the marriage ends in divorce, both parties end up being able to extract some value from it. For a retail diamond the purchaser is likely to see zero value recovered from it whether divorce happens or not.

For cars, I suppose my hypothesis would say cars likely to depreciate very quickly (such as high-end SUV) are more suitable as engagement gifts than practical (prius or such), which fits roughly with my observations in real world

Re: Pandora says laboratory-made diamonds are forever

#287
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…

"Okay class, child labour, a few thousand poor people dead, terrorist groups starving hundreds of thousands, destroying schools and libraries. That is where diamonds come from. How many would still want a natural diamond because diamonds are forever?" The elephant in that lecture hall was probably the hypocrisy. I think if you still raise a hand after hearing all that, the issue isn't branding at all. It's narcissim,…

It's not that simple.

Almost everyone buys clothes, electronics made with child labor.

I think you might have clothes made with child labor as well.

Why do you draw the line at diamonds?

Re: Pandora says laboratory-made diamonds are forever

#288

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?

Always remember the whole diamond ring thing was a marketing putsh by DeBeers in the first place. https://www.theatlantic.com/international/archive/2015/02/ho... So arguably buying a diamond ring has always been a symbol of wage oppression and terrible mining conditions in Africa, and any right thinking person should boycott it. Fortunately my SO isn't that struck by sparkly rocks. She prefers antique jewellery with…

Diamond engagement rings date back to 1477, and diamond jewelry dates back much further. It was viewed as very exclusive/rare. Diamond engagement rings for the masses was from DeBeers advertising starting in 1938.

The growth in diamond mine production in the late 1800s tremendously increased diamond supply. DeBeers took advantage of historical perception of rarity and actual lower cost of materials to create a new market.

Re: Pandora says laboratory-made diamonds are forever

#290

Earlier quoted context omitted.

While I personally don’t think natural diamonds are any more valuable than synthetic. I understand the scarcity and way it’s used to show status (similar to cars, we don’t need great ones). That being said, what I actually took away from that comment... was that the teacher in geology class was presenting effectively political argument as opposed to teaching. Explaining the process of fine, but given what you describ…

>I think everyone kinda knows about synthetic diamonds, they just don’t care. I 100% disagree. The stigma around cubic zirconia and 'fake' jewelry is real and alive, and absolutely carries over to any kind of man-made gems. I also don't think most people have any idea at all about the issues in the gem trade. Source: My highly educated co-workers who were astounded to read about conditions in emerald mines after Elon…

what does elon musk have to do with emerald mines?
Post reply on HN