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

Shaking Up the Diamond Industry

newyorker.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

51–60 of 130 posts

Re: Shaking Up the Diamond Industry

#51

Post by Riguad87 »

anonu wrote: post #17

Really cool history. Thanks for sharing this. I can imagine if you "know the truth" about the business you're in you might want to get out. I felt like that about certain financial jobs I've had in the past. The actual work felt like it provided no real value to society, but the intellectual challenges were what kept me there.

If you think into the problem some more, I believe that you will conclude, on the face of the natural problem and without need of further information, that exit from a complicated family concern is the provision of the older generations and never in the realms of practical viability for those who inherit legacy management and ownership.

I am very much interested in knowing your thoughts, should you, on reflection find my point above not to be self evident.

Re: Shaking Up the Diamond Industry

#52

Post by tacheiordache »

grecy wrote: post #43
arczyx wrote: post #20

Earlier quoted context omitted.

To be fair, paying the government in taxes and royalty does not mean that the diamond is not obtained through exploitation of the local population while the corrupt officials took the money (this sometimes happened in my country). I don't really know about Botswana though, if those money actually go to the Botswanans then good for them.

> I don't really know about Botswana though, if those money actually go to the Botswanans then good for them. Botswana is probably the best run and least corrupt country in Southern Africa (maybe all of Africa). They've never had a war of any kind, are incredibly friendly to everyone regardless of skin color, etc. etc. They are famous for tricking the British into giving them mineral rights before they were granted i…

We, Romanians are very emotionally attached to Botswana’s currency. It means in Romanian, the most important thing men pride themselves with.

Re: Shaking Up the Diamond Industry

#53

Post by jtms »

bruceb wrote: post #50

One way to shake up the industry is just not to buy diamond wedding rings. That simple. Big rocks on a finger make the person seem needy and insecure. Like I need this big flashy thing is proof of my worth.

Anecdotally, many younger couples I know are going with lab made stones or gemstones other than diamonds.

Re: Shaking Up the Diamond Industry

#54

Post by kijin »

brandnewlow wrote: post #48
andrepd wrote: post #29

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>The actual work felt like it provided no real value to society A sign of a broken system that needs urgent repair. Most financial jobs, hft, adtech jobs... We have our best minds working on things that do not provide any useful value to society. This is not a good state of affairs.

I can’t speak to finance but I get confused when people bash advertising in broad strokes. People running businesses need ways to exchange money for new customers. That’s advertising. Making that more efficient might surely be annoying but a complete waste of time?

The parent said adtech, not advertising. What we call adtech today is advertising plus tracking. The tracking part is what most people seem to have a problem with.

Re: Shaking Up the Diamond Industry

#55

Post by Riguad87 »

brandnewlow wrote: post #48
andrepd wrote: post #29

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>The actual work felt like it provided no real value to society A sign of a broken system that needs urgent repair. Most financial jobs, hft, adtech jobs... We have our best minds working on things that do not provide any useful value to society. This is not a good state of affairs.

I can’t speak to finance but I get confused when people bash advertising in broad strokes. People running businesses need ways to exchange money for new customers. That’s advertising. Making that more efficient might surely be annoying but a complete waste of time?

I still say we ignored the Main Street and non-scale non-flow micro-sensitive and disaggregated or rather yet to be aggregated, customers, not whole by reasons superficially readily learned.

Sobel's The First Junk Bond, gives the mechanics of preservation of the vast onshore reserves, until (I don't have the recall but I think Sobel gives the trigger price) $50/B plateaux.

In 95 I wrote the level of inefficiency in agency transactions was 60%.

In 2018, stories on the embedded framework fraud of online advertising buying, gave the same number for the new system's inefficiency.

Print, my world despite the gasping inhalation of every party I speak with, remains almost unchanged in headline volumes, despite the unbroken prophecy of all trade journalism.

Re: Shaking Up the Diamond Industry

#56

Post by tony0x02 »

galangalalgol wrote: post #25
matwood wrote: post #23

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> everyone thinks it’s a diamond and we haven’t yet felt the need to correct them It also avoids conversations that have few good outcomes. Tell someone who spent $$$$ on a diamond that you think diamonds are a waste of money or a humanitarian disaster, and it's not a great way to start a conversation. There are also other colored stones that I think are nicer looking than diamonds, but moissanite provides a nice way…

Synthetic diamond will eventually become so easy the industry won't be able to supress it anymore. The collapse will be interesting, in the bloddy sense of the term I suspect.

I think we're close if not already there.

Re: Shaking Up the Diamond Industry

#57

Post by saidajigumi »

brandnewlow wrote: post #48
andrepd wrote: post #29

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>The actual work felt like it provided no real value to society A sign of a broken system that needs urgent repair. Most financial jobs, hft, adtech jobs... We have our best minds working on things that do not provide any useful value to society. This is not a good state of affairs.

I can’t speak to finance but I get confused when people bash advertising in broad strokes. People running businesses need ways to exchange money for new customers. That’s advertising. Making that more efficient might surely be annoying but a complete waste of time?

I think you have a vast disconnect between the reality of advertising today vs. the quaint mid-20th century mental model that you seem to hold. Or you're being entirely disingenuous about what people complaining about "advertising" mean.

If modern advertising 1) did not vacuum up personal data in extremely invasive ways, 2) didn't distort the entire business models of the largest tech companies against the interests of the overwhelming majority of their users, and 3) wasn't a broad attack vector on that same user population (dark patterns, outright malware delivery, just plain terrible UX everywhere, etc.)... then there'd probably be very little complaint about advertising, relatively speaking.

Put another way: no one gripes about the existence of Craigslist. Thought experiment: what if the targeted advertising model was illegal, both enforceable and enforced with teeth. How much of what's detrimental about modern advertising would simply vanish, like a bad memory?

Re: Shaking Up the Diamond Industry

#58

Post by Infinitesimus »

CrazyStat wrote: post #26
irishcoffee wrote: post #11

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I was fortunate enough to discover moissanite. Wife loves it, and the price was somewhere in the ballpark of 90-95% cheaper than an equivalent size diamond. The added benefit is, everyone thinks it’s a diamond and we haven’t yet felt the need to correct them...

I also went with moissanite. My wife (then girlfriend) was in the "2-3 months salary for a diamond" camp which I find incredibly crass. Saved $15k on the diamond by going with moissanite and spent a fraction of that on getting a nice custom ring + wedding band made by an independent local jeweler instead. I was happy to support a local craftsman rather than DeBeers & co.

Did her perspective change or does she believe she got an expensive diamond?

Re: Shaking Up the Diamond Industry

#59

Post by 77pt77 »

galangalalgol wrote: post #25
matwood wrote: post #23

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> everyone thinks it’s a diamond and we haven’t yet felt the need to correct them It also avoids conversations that have few good outcomes. Tell someone who spent $$$$ on a diamond that you think diamonds are a waste of money or a humanitarian disaster, and it's not a great way to start a conversation. There are also other colored stones that I think are nicer looking than diamonds, but moissanite provides a nice way…

Synthetic diamond will eventually become so easy the industry won't be able to supress it anymore. The collapse will be interesting, in the bloddy sense of the term I suspect.

"Synthetic" diamonds are better in all objective criteria that "natural" diamonds. Before they were a thing they would even be considered top quality diamonds.

Once they were mass produced the criteria changed and now the "natural" with higher degree of impurities (a previously undesirable trait) are considered better.

It's not about the rock. The rock is a placeholder. It's about how much you spent on the rock (commitment) and the fact that it's not available to everyone (social proof).

Re: Shaking Up the Diamond Industry

#60

Post by jseliger »

lordnacho wrote: post #4

I still wish I'd discovered Moissanite before I got married. The rock would have been multiples larger and I'd have the satisfaction of not contributing to a monopolistic and exploitative industry.

There has been more noise around lab-grown diamonds as of late: https://qz.com/630512/would-you-propose-with-a-diamond-grown....
Post reply on HN