Pandora says laboratory-made diamonds are forever • Hacker News Board

Re: Pandora says laboratory-made diamonds are forever

#521

Post by simonh » Tue, May 04, 2021, 5:16 PM UTC

dijit wrote: post #83

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…

> 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. If your business is to force people into slavery, then it is part of your business to remove other avenues for them to get out of slavery.

Who said anything about slavery? The vast majority of third world workers mining diamonds do so in the regulated commercial sector. These are largely technical engineering jobs that bring investment in infrastructure into the country, certainly much more so than many other local opportunities. A single mine like those in Botswana can employ thousands of people, and be the core of the local economy. I'm not saying there are no slaves in diamond mines, but if so it's a marginal source.

Oh my good grief. What on earth did you think I was advocating?

Re: Pandora says laboratory-made diamonds are forever

#522

Post by simonh » Tue, May 04, 2021, 5:18 PM UTC

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.

Well of course, that's what I'm saying, just taking away jobs for miners doesn't do that.

Re: Pandora says laboratory-made diamonds are forever

#523

Post by [deleted] » Tue, May 04, 2021, 5:18 PM UTC

woofcat wrote: post #505

55555 wrote: post #481

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Warren Buffet takes this even further. He doesn't spend any money on consumption, choosing instead to invest it for 21+ years. And then he keeps it invested and refuses to give it to his children. (He's giving it all to charity, though.)

Yeah, I just enjoy the logic of: "How dare you spend what at the end of the day is a trivial amount of money on something that your significant other appreciates and enjoys. You should be eating soylent green and living in a 400 square foot home!" If I were struggling to get by, it would be a fair discussion. However the audience on HN I presume to be middle class, if not upper middle class it seems like an odd argum…

[deleted]

Re: Pandora says laboratory-made diamonds are forever

#524

Post by rags2riches » Tue, May 04, 2021, 5:18 PM UTC

gandalfian wrote: post #516

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…

Didn't ice cubes made from icebergs command a premium price once? Don't know if it was deserved.

My ice cubes are also made from icebergs. They just melted a long time ago!

Re: Pandora says laboratory-made diamonds are forever

#525

Post by aksss » Tue, May 04, 2021, 5:19 PM UTC

sopooneo wrote: post #325

GordonS wrote: post #281

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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…

My guess is that we need a sweeping, emotion-fill, romantic story toward something else, not just away from the current diamond-status quo. There certainly is a quiet satisfaction, and clear conscience, in avoidance of evil. But no joy in the act of NOT. A normal person who repeatedly throws aside a full heart in favor of facts will not wake up singing for many years. There needs to be a new song to replace the old,…

Dude.. people don’t think about who’s making their Nikes or Apple products or tshirts. They buy these incidental products with zero concern for the people producing them. How noble are we, talking about refusing to buy blood diamonds when the very MEMS mic in a household device probably vibrated to the scream of people watching a friend jumping out a factory window.

Getting people to care about who’s winning and losing in a production lifecycle seems like something that doesn’t get fixed initially with the diamond-buying crowd when the shoe-buying consumers don’t even care.

I think what I’m struggling to get at is that the diamond-buying population at least have these earnest “noble ideals” of love, unity, etc represented by this product for which at some low level the sacrifice and blood may _add_ value (god knows what unconscious calculus is at work in the mind of a grown princess). Compare this to a pair of crap tennis shoes that you’re going to throw away, where they are completely utilitarian, replaceable, and you have zero emotional investment in what they represent. The suffering represented by the product offers nothing other than the blatant profit of the consumer. And we can’t wrest the shoes from the consumer’s hands no matter what is said about the abysmal conditions that produced them.

All of these conditions in the production of these products are known. Nobody can claim ignorance in the first world. If the population at large hasn’t had a moment of moral clarity by now, I’m not sure I’d hold my breath any longer. Either systemically the culture needs to be more open to moral awakenings (a hard sell in a world defined by deconstructionism) or a new and acceptable critique of globalism at a policy level needs radical change.

Just my .02 but I’ve been hearing the same convo about diamonds since I was a kid and it’s as sad as hearing the rationalizing of any addict.

Re: Pandora says laboratory-made diamonds are forever

#526

Post by astura » Tue, May 04, 2021, 5:19 PM UTC

jogjayr wrote: post #341

astura wrote: post #314

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Because houses and cars are useful, the GP pointed out that being uselessness is the entire point >the high cost and useless-ness of the gift are a feature not a bug The other thing is the marketing says diamonds are "forever," presumably like your love, but houses and cars require expensive maintenance and are easily damaged. Not good if you're buying something symbolic. Not that I personally agree, far from it, we…

> The other thing is the marketing says diamonds are "forever," presumably like your love, but houses and cars require expensive maintenance and are easily damaged. Not good if you're buying something symbolic. Definitely some symbolism there. Relationships (romantic and otherwise) are indeed more like houses and cars - innately valuable, easily damaged, and requiring regular maintenance - than diamonds.

Right, I agree (and that's why I'm not "into" diamonds/useless trinkets) - but that's a realistic take, not the sort of thing people who are buying/receiving diamonds want.

Re: Pandora says laboratory-made diamonds are forever

#527

Post by caeril » Tue, May 04, 2021, 5:20 PM UTC

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 realized the strength of diamonds product branding

No, that's not it.

Diamonds are conspicuous status signaling. It's a very human, even animal drive. DeBeers gets a lot of hate, and much of it deservedly so, but they tapped into and exploited our nature - they didn't create it.

Re: Pandora says laboratory-made diamonds are forever

#528

Post by RobertKerans » Tue, May 04, 2021, 5:22 PM UTC

shuntress wrote: post #482

washadjeffmad wrote: post #406

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I went through this not that many years ago buying a ring for my SO. My biggest mistake was including her in the decision. She described what she wanted exactly– nothing gaudy or ostentatious, just a singular, tasteful stone on a plain band. Couldn't be simpler, could it? Finding stones that met her criteria was easy. Some were natural diamonds, some lab grown, many moissanite. From the outset, she said the meaning o…

Depending on how long ago this happened, you may either already know this or have since worked through it but this was probably not really just about the ring. I think the comments attacking your partner may be assuming that this "uncharacteristic tears and shouting" was some sort of irrational hysteria rather than the boiling-over of simmering problems. Maybe I'm the one reading too far into it though.

Nah, I don't think so. + it's not an irrational reaction, can't logic out of it.

Re: Pandora says laboratory-made diamonds are forever

#529

Post by RobertKerans » Tue, May 04, 2021, 5:24 PM UTC

jbay808 wrote: post #504

RobertKerans wrote: post #496

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Well, if you ever want an example of advertising working... (I realise it plays enormously on preexisting traditional cultural notions of value, but still, as mentioned, de Beers did quite the job). I had similar conversations pre-engagement, but felt forced into a real diamond once the time actually came.

"Real diamond" as opposed to zirconia, or did you mean natural diamond (as opposed to a real artificial diamond)?

Natural, as in what would commonly be referred to as a real diamond (yes, I realise they're they're chemically and structurally the same).

Edit: As I said in another reply, there's nothing illogical about it. If value is placed culturally and socially on natural diamonds, then they are valuable, regardless of if that value is "artificially" created via advertising of whatever. Lots of stuff is quite stupid if you look at it objectively, out of context. Doesn't mean it isn't true in context.

Re: Pandora says laboratory-made diamonds are forever

#530

Post by astura » Tue, May 04, 2021, 5:25 PM UTC

saberdancer wrote: post #429

akarma wrote: post #422

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Many women won't directly tell their partner "I want you to spend a couple months' salary on a beautiful diamond" because it's tasteless to request and it removes all the meaning behind the man doing so, but they'd also be disappointed if the man didn't do so unprompted. People and their emotions are complex like that. I don't think there's any glaring issue with either party above, but it's like you expect all women…

It's like typical "I don't need anything for my birthday". Even the most rational people tend to get disappointed if they really get nothing.

Um, no, I've never gotten disappointed. I've been married for a decade and the hubby and I don't do material gifts, ever.

I'd be much more disappointed in some useless trinket I don't need and would feel obligated to keep.