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

Synthetic diamonds are now purer, more beautiful, and cheaper than mined

worksinprogress.co

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

411–420 of 511 posts

Re: Synthetic diamonds are now purer, more beautiful, and cheaper than mined

#411

Post by hungie »

ninetyninenine wrote: post #300
wkat4242 wrote: post #239

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Hmm that sounds a bit shallow and materialistic tbh. But I have to say I'm an outlier anyway, I've never been married and I prefer polyamorous relationships. And I've never had real money to speak of. So I'm not really the right type. I do know the families with a big house and fancy dinner parties with Sunday silverware. But I tend to stay away from those settings :) I don't fit in and I don't even own a suit or dre…

It is shallow. Women want tribute or some sort of proof that you care. This is the true meaning of romance. Romance is essentially a man paying some sort of tribute to a woman mostly in the form of time, effort and/or money.

Can we avoid painting with such a broad brush? "Women want tribute" is a wild thing to assert.

Re: Synthetic diamonds are now purer, more beautiful, and cheaper than mined

#412

Post by dijit »

craftkiller wrote: post #410
dijit wrote: post #358

Earlier quoted context omitted.

They did however manage to get Sapphire on the watch display (at least on the stainless steel LTE edition of the apple watch series 4 and 8, which I'm aware of). The difference between my watch (which was 4 years old at the time) and a colleagues almost brand new apple watch (without the sapphire) was really telling, is his was lightly scratched on the edges despite him being quite careful, and I was exceedingly reck…

The sapphire on the Apple watch was a marketing gimmick, barely better than gorilla glass: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RF72hGIdrG8&t=10m20s But there are other devices with better sapphire that actually live up to the hype.

Well, maybe.

I have now had watches for 10 years without issue and my phone displays seem to scratch.

I’m not doubting you’re correct, I never boight it for this reason, it was just an interesting retrospective observation. Clearly its working for me, and I’m not sure I have anything with gorilla glass.

Unless the Pixel 7 has it.

EDIT: My Pixel 7 does have gorilla glass indeed and it has two scratches on the display despite being extremely rarely used. (its my work phone and sits on my desk mostly)

Re: Synthetic diamonds are now purer, more beautiful, and cheaper than mined

#413

Post by adrian_b »

alex_duf wrote: post #367
semi-extrinsic wrote: post #345

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> some innovation is just around the corner It's already here! Stainless steel for pots, carbon steel for pans. Once I got my first carbon steel pan (not cast iron) I knew it was game over for the teflon pans in my house. I'm now gradually replacing the teflon pans with carbon steel, and then I'll never have to replace another pan in my lifetime. The upcoming PFAS ban in Europe will probably accelerate this transitio…

I replaced my téflon pans with carbon steel. I find the transition and learning curve to be much more difficult than téflon. Cooking an egg is a big no-no, I need to think about when to squeeze a lemon or when to put my tomato sauce otherwise I might damage the seasoning. Nothing blocking but definitely a lot of things I don't want to think about.

The fastest and the easiest way to cook eggs is in a closed glass vessel in a microwave oven.

The power and time must be selected carefully, to avoid explosions, but once the right combination is determined it will always be perfectly reproducible.

I prefer to separate the egg whites and the yolks before cooking (and mix them with different ingredients, possibly whipping the egg whites first), but making fried eggs or scrambled eggs is as easy.

The eggs can be cooked alone and mixed later with other ingredients, or they can be mixed with other ingredients before putting them in the oven.

Re: Synthetic diamonds are now purer, more beautiful, and cheaper than mined

#414

Post by pixl97 »

db48x wrote: post #301
jiggawatts wrote: post #207

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Magic book = iPad or Remarkable Atomic fabber = chip fabs making things on ~10 atom scales 3D printing homes is possible now, just a bit niche

And yet we’re not really there yet. The book wasn't just a tablet computer; it was programmed to continually analyze everything happening around it and relate those events back to the education of the owner. It shocked a bully who was playing keep–away with it. It noticed that the owner was eating junk food, and taught her a better diet. It taught her to read, as well as manners and exercises and elocution. Later a c…

When I first read Diamond Age is was 90% science fiction, now it's seemingly far less than that.

Environmental sensing is a little weak in our own devices, but in theory your cell phone could listen to everything you do and (externally) analyze it for things like a bad diet. You'd have to point the camera intentionally at things you're doing for it to capture that information.

Now, no one is going to make a product that shocks people holding it, yet this isn't an impossibility. Failing to login, or having the camera capture the wrong person is using could very easily be designed in to the product. No one is going to do that for fear of lawsuits.

Re: Synthetic diamonds are now purer, more beautiful, and cheaper than mined

#416

Post by unusualmonkey »

dirtdobber wrote: post #403

Natural diamonds have value in terms of luxury. Synthetics do not, hence why they are cheap. If you want to buy a diamond because you think they're pretty, buy a synthetic one. If you want to buy a diamond as a luxury gift, buy a natural one. Rolex doesn't put synthetic diamonds on watches. Cartier doesn't put synthetic diamonds on bracelets. Tiffany's won't put synthetic diamonds on rings. If you think that natural…

I find it ironic that you decided to try to justify natural diamonds... just to say that synthetic diamond purchasers always try to justify it.

Pot, Kettle and all that. With probably a large helping of selection bias.

Re: Synthetic diamonds are now purer, more beautiful, and cheaper than mined

#417

Post by dirtdobber »

hungie wrote: post #406
dirtdobber wrote: post #403

Natural diamonds have value in terms of luxury. Synthetics do not, hence why they are cheap. If you want to buy a diamond because you think they're pretty, buy a synthetic one. If you want to buy a diamond as a luxury gift, buy a natural one. Rolex doesn't put synthetic diamonds on watches. Cartier doesn't put synthetic diamonds on bracelets. Tiffany's won't put synthetic diamonds on rings. If you think that natural…

Why though. Like, genuinely, why bother with the mined ones? "This diamond caused untold human suffering and exploitation to acquire, and that makes it rare and valuable." It's just a weird flex at this point. It marks you out as someone who doesn't care about the wellbeing of others. But every time someone gets excited about natural diamonds they try to justify that synthetic ones just aren't the same. I think that…

> "This diamond caused untold human suffering and exploitation to acquire."

Dude, the copper in your phone required untold human suffering and exploitation to acquire.

You want to profess some grand moral judgement about purchasing mined minerals, but I guarantee all of that moral judgment goes out the door when it comes to products that you can afford and want to buy.

Re: Synthetic diamonds are now purer, more beautiful, and cheaper than mined

#418

Post by unusualmonkey »

sxv wrote: post #386
saghm wrote: post #294

When my fiancee and I got engaged last year, we bought our rings from a place that (in addition to having a robust process that allowed us to avoid having to go anywhere in person) uses lab-grown gemstones. Not only is the quality quite high and the color impressive (she picked a pink sapphire), the prices were much lower than we expected. I'm not really sure why anyone would want a "real" diamond at this point; you…

Many see a value in "natural" objects that is absent in those engineered by man. There is a raw energy and story behind it. Would you be just as awe-struck by a magnificent waterfall built by engineers flowing atop beautiful factory-produced rocks as one created by geologic forces over millennia?

The Bellagio in Vegas is pretty awesome.

Re: Synthetic diamonds are now purer, more beautiful, and cheaper than mined

#420

Post by dirtdobber »

unusualmonkey wrote: post #416
dirtdobber wrote: post #403

Natural diamonds have value in terms of luxury. Synthetics do not, hence why they are cheap. If you want to buy a diamond because you think they're pretty, buy a synthetic one. If you want to buy a diamond as a luxury gift, buy a natural one. Rolex doesn't put synthetic diamonds on watches. Cartier doesn't put synthetic diamonds on bracelets. Tiffany's won't put synthetic diamonds on rings. If you think that natural…

I find it ironic that you decided to try to justify natural diamonds... just to say that synthetic diamond purchasers always try to justify it. Pot, Kettle and all that. With probably a large helping of selection bias.

Wrong, read again. No justification for buying natural diamonds. Just stating the facts: current market dynamics make the distinction that natural diamonds are a luxury product while synthetic diamonds are not. I clearly stated that people should buy natural vs synthetic based on those market dynamics and their own personal preferences.
Post reply on HN