Artificial Diamonds?

Would you care if a diamond is machine-made?

  • I prefer natural diamonds even if they are more expensive.

    Votes: 4 12.1%
  • I prefer natural diamonds because they are more expensive.

    Votes: 0 0.0%
  • When equally priced, I prefer natural diamonds.

    Votes: 5 15.2%
  • When equally priced, I prefer artificial diamonds.

    Votes: 3 9.1%
  • I prefer artificial diamonds because they are cheap.

    Votes: 1 3.0%
  • I don't care.

    Votes: 11 33.3%
  • (I hate diamonds.) or (I won't be buying one anyway.)

    Votes: 9 27.3%

  • Total voters
    33

nihilistic

Intergalatic Delivery Boy
Joined
Feb 24, 2003
Messages
3,261
Location
NNYC
Wired Article
SlashDot

Methods of artificially manufacturing diamonds are emerging. Doubtlessly these machine made diamonds will cause a shift in the diamond industry, with implications as immediate as your next engagement ring or as far and aloft as being used in a new generation of semiconductors.

Let's talk about the immediate effects:

Would you care if a diamond is machine-made?
 
I think men should do whatever possible to hide the knowledge of artificial diamons from women, while we reap the benefits of getting a cheaper diamond. I wouldn't care, if the woman knew she'd probably be dissapointed.
 
I wouldn't care. Furthermore, I might even develop a more negative view on any girl that I date that do care.
 
Artificial. Cheap to begin with, then if she divorces you, she tries to pawn it and finds out it's worth squat. HAHAHAHA!

But seriously, why should you have to buy a woman a rock to prove that you love her?
 
The only diamond i ever cared about was the one i found in the sand in a playground when i was 12. It looked like it came off of a ring so i waited a few days and then sold it for $300. Then i put the money in the bank but it collected maybe $20 in the worthless bank so i bought some Health Sciences mutual funds stock and i have $2000 so far. Bad economy my ass, i'm gettin rich (to me, $2000 is a lot to a 16 year old who doesn't have a job. i get 20 bucks and i think i'm friggin bill gates). On the topic of diamonds i haven't found, i find it ******ed for anybody to pay 4 million dollars, or for that matter 300 for a shimmering piece of rock. oooooooh, its glitters.
 
I perfer Natural Diamonds, due because of its pure natural crystal structure ;).
 
I prefer artificial diamonds and I hope this development drives DeBeers (the global diamond cartel) out of business, because diamonds are worthless rocks priced in blood.

http://www.stanford.edu/class/e297c...avery_colonialism_and_hiv_aids/lcrenshaw.html

For ages human beings have placed great value in relatively useless baubles and trinkets. These items, whether they are precious metals, stones or minerals, have relatively little tangible value other than their visual appeal, as well as their rarity. Of these “precious” metals and stones the diamond has been the ultimate fancy of individuals in the modern era; these small, clear pieces of carbon have been valued for the beauty, and for their supposed rarity. Men struggled for centuries to find steady sources of these gems that could be collected and turned into jewelry. Finally in 1888, following the lead of colonialism, Cecil Rhodes formed the De Beers Mining Corporation, which would create a total monopoly over the diamond industry.

The reason behind the creation of such an organization, as reasoned by Rhodes and others, was that diamonds were in fact not as scarce a commodity as originally imagined. In fact, there was such an abundant supply of diamonds coming out of mines from Southern Africa that strict limitations over the availability of diamonds had to be instituted. In essence, an artificial scarcity was created. In order to sustain this scarcity, DeBeers brokers have attempted to buy virtually every diamond that is dug from a mine. Presently they purchase over 70% of the diamonds unearthed around the world every year.

Historically De Beers has shown very little concern as to whether these diamonds were produced by a legitimate supplier, or by illegal means, and it is this indiscretion which is the root of many of the problems that face diamond rich nations in Africa today. De Beers alone sets the price of rough diamonds produced on the global market today. This manipulation of supply and demand for rough diamonds is manipulated from their Central Selling Organization, which is based out of London. The CSO brings together gems produced from De Beers’s mines, as well as the “outside market”, or non De Beers mines.

As of 1998 the international diamond industry produced an estimated 115 million carats of rough diamonds with a market value of $6.7 billion. At the end of the diamond refinement process they were converted into 67.1 billion pieces of jewelry that was worth close to $50 billion. Diamonds, rather than funding the growth of many African nations have only served to be a source of conflict instead. Companies such as De Beers and others have directly contributed to the death and strife caused in many parts of Africa, in particular Sierra Leone and Angola. These two countries in particular continue to suffer the effects of civil war which are greatly funded through diamonds.

So, yeah, I prefer artificial diamonds.
 
I choose the last alternative: I hate diamonds. The whole concept disgusts me. The high cost is because jewel industry is holding them back. They are being extracted from mines with something hardly different from slave labour, at high risk.

All this would of course not count for artificial diamonds, but as the real thing is not of interest, nor will the artificial ones be.

But I encourage the development, so that this dirty trade maybe finally will come to an end.
 
Originally posted by Thadlerian
All this would of course not count for artificial diamonds, but as the real thing is not of interest, nor will the artificial ones be.

Well, cheap artificial diamonds are still nice because they will revolutionize the semiconductor industry. Microprocessors built on diamond wafers could run at much higher speed than ones built on silicon wafers due to diamond's high thermal conductivity.
 
There was a time, not that long ago, when if you asked, someone would have told you, "No. This ring is real glass." Inside of a decade it should be possible to make diamonds odf a size that is not found in nature. It will do to the diamond industry what cultured pearls did to the pearl industry. I'm not sure that is a bad thing. Losing DeBeers is a good thing.

J
 
They are still real diamonds, just produced by man. It wouldn't bother me. They are just trinkets anyway, and the true value of a diamond is only what you give it.
 
I was suprised to find, on purchasing an engagement ring, that the source country of the diamond could not be determined. Being partially aware of the issues surrounding diamond mines I wanted to know to give me some idea of how it came to be in the shop.

The (professional) assistant simply told me they had no way to find out from their supplier as they had several sources, which doesn't fit in with Die Another Day but what do I know?
 
A diamond is a diamond--whether the pressures and temperatures that made it came from millions of years underground, or a few minutes in a machine, objectively they are the same thing. And DeBeers can kiss my ass.

If a girl I'm about to get engaged to is hung up on whether the diamond is "natural" or machine-made, I will ask her if she'd rather have quasi-slave labor digging it up for her out of the ground (with some middle man getting rich off the "service" of distributing it to me), or a skilled AMERICAN worker who gets decent wages making it for her (and costing LESS!). If she'd rather the former, I'd show her the door. It really wouldn't be that hard a decision for me. Hopefully I'll be discerning enough to screen such a woman off before it becomes time to buy a ring, so that that conversation will never happen. Although I was a fool once, having the fiancee I DID have....
 
I don't care much about diamonds. I think the engagement ring I bought had a real one, but who am I to know. Artificial ones seem fine to me. Actually, I heard the other day that people who chose to be cremated upon their death, could have their ashes turned into a diamond. I don't know how much this costs, but it could give new meaning to the saying "worth more dead than alive."
 
Originally posted by MummyMan
On the topic of diamonds i haven't found, i find it ******ed for anybody to pay 4 million dollars, or for that matter 300 for a shimmering piece of rock. oooooooh, its glitters.

What if you have a reasonable expectation that you can sell it, at a profit, later on?
 
Anybody here read 'Atlas Shrugged'? The whole diamond debate reminds me of the bracelet Hank Reardon gives his wife, made of the alloy he'd just invented. It's the first thing ever forged from the alloy, but she thinks it's worthless because it's not made of gold or diamonds. Dagny Taggart recognizes it as a symbol of human progress and ingenuity, and exchanges her own diamond bracelet for the one made of the Reardon metal. Both women walk away thinking they got the better deal.

As jewelry, natural diamonds are only valuable because (1) the deBeers monopoly restricts their sales, and (2) people think they're pretty. Synthetics are chemically identical to natural diamonds, except they weren't extracted by ten year-olds forced into the mines at the barrel of a gun. They can already be produced in more colours, larger sizes, and in customized shapes, than natural diamonds, satisfying the second condition. Hopefully, they'll soon be cheap enough to destroy deBeers and fulfill the first.

I'm much more interested in their manufacturing potential. Synthetics have already displaced natural diamonds for drill production. Think of the possibilities that arise as the price goes down:

Roads paved with diamond-dust mixed with the asphalt, increasing durability.

Diamond mirrors for lasers, dramatically increasing manufacturing quality and productivity.

Shatter-proof diamond eyeglasses, made to order.

Diamond-edged knives which never need sharpening.

Synthetics, definitely, for me.
 
The industrial applications of diamond coatings are staggeringly broad. Anything that requires great pressure or extreme rigidity could be done better and likely more cost effectively with diamonds. Imagine what could be pressed with diamond dies, plus you can see through them.

Then there is the field of optics. Diamond precision lenses would never scratch and would maintain shape and curvature much better.

The jewelery aspects are just the leading edge. Within 50 years diamonds will be everywhere.

J
 
Diamonds apall me. People work like slaves to retreive them so people who have too much money can buy them as a superficial symbol of love. If you really love someone, then you don't need a diamond to show you love them. However in rich capitalist society, many men will give a diamond to keep a loveless marriage together. Sure, they make great presents, but that does not justify people slaving away to get them. However, I am glad that diamonds are being put to more practical uses in
 
recently i read somewhere that you can get your loved ones ashes turned into a diamond (for a large lump sum of course!). that to me is worse than a machiene made diamond!
 
Top Bottom