5 ms·

>>Historically the diamond industry was structurally flawed -the De Beers monopoly controlled prices. Nonsense! With no utility, De Beers' monopoly is the only

>>Historically the diamond industry was structurally flawed -the De Beers monopoly controlled prices. Nonsense! With no utility, De Beers' monopoly is the only reason why these objects have value.

airblade 12y ago
That's incorrect. On the gem side, the vast majority of people wearing diamonds would tell you they have utility. On the industrial side, diamond is a fascinating material with physical properties at the extremes, e.g. hardness, thermal conductivity, electrical conductivity, etc etc. It is vital in many applications where there is simply no other material which could fulfil the physical requirements.
- frozenport 12y ago
  >>people wearing diamonds would tell you they have utility Fashions change, yet people believe that diamonds have permanent value ('is forever'). In contrast to bullion, this is relatively recent development with little ties to traditional banking practices. >>On the industrial side, diamond is a fascinating material These can be made on demand, and cutting diamonds cost something like $1 per carat. Nobody is raging against the crystal lattice.
  - argumentum 12y ago
    > Fashions change, yet people believe that diamonds have permanent value ('is forever'). In contrast to bullion, this is relatively recent development with little ties to traditional banking practices No, actually diamonds (and other gems) have had artistic/cultural/symbolic value for as long as civilizations have existed. I.e. the "crown jewels", the "hope diamond" and more: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_diamonds http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_diamonds They simply do wonders with light and are aesthetically pleasing when well cut. Not to mention they are incredibly hard to destroy.
    - deleted 12y ago
      [deleted]
  - airblade 12y ago
    > These can be made on demand Yes and no. Also the ability to make diamond is pretty recent with a lot of the fundamental research having been funded by De Beers.
danmaz74 12y ago
Diamonds are an incredibly important status symbol, especially for women. That has value.
- anakha 12y ago
  Speaking of which, the linked article from The Atlantic in 1982 discusses why that is the case. http://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/1982/02/have-you-ever-tried-to-sell-a-diamond/304575/ http://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/1982/02/have-you...
- rhizome 12y ago
  That specific articulation of value is also a recent development: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jean_Baudrillard#The_object_value_system http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jean_Baudrillard#The_object_val...
- zanny 12y ago
  A completely arbitrary value that only requires a critical mass of women to being valuing some other arbitrary gauge of status as a surrogate. Consider how in the last few years owning Apple products has become its own perverse symbol of status, because Apple played an extremely effective rebranding campaign.
  - rhizome 12y ago
    It's not arbitrary, though. Like all values, they are derived from an exchange. And to be fair, Apple's popularity is not only as a status symbol. For many people they provide a well-priced combination of features, sometimes extremely well-priced. A MacBook Air by any other company costs at least 50% more. If anything, your comment illustrates that Apple is saddled by their old reputation as having overpriced offerings, despite shifts of focus in their marketing campaigns.
- deleted 12y ago
  [deleted]

>>Historically the diamond industry was structurally flawed -the De Beers monopoly controlled prices. Nonsense! With no utility, De Beers' monopoly is the only reason why these objects have value.

airblade 12y ago

That's incorrect. On the gem side, the vast majority of people wearing diamonds would tell you they have utility. On the industrial side, diamond is a fascinating material with physical properties at the extremes, e.g. hardness, thermal conductivity, electrical conductivity, etc etc. It is vital in many applications where there is simply no other material which could fulfil the physical requirements.

frozenport 12y ago
>>people wearing diamonds would tell you they have utility Fashions change, yet people believe that diamonds have permanent value ('is forever'). In contrast to bullion, this is relatively recent development with little ties to traditional banking practices. >>On the industrial side, diamond is a fascinating material These can be made on demand, and cutting diamonds cost something like $1 per carat. Nobody is raging against the crystal lattice.
- argumentum 12y ago
  > Fashions change, yet people believe that diamonds have permanent value ('is forever'). In contrast to bullion, this is relatively recent development with little ties to traditional banking practices No, actually diamonds (and other gems) have had artistic/cultural/symbolic value for as long as civilizations have existed. I.e. the "crown jewels", the "hope diamond" and more: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_diamonds http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_diamonds They simply do wonders with light and are aesthetically pleasing when well cut. Not to mention they are incredibly hard to destroy.
  - deleted 12y ago
    [deleted]
- airblade 12y ago
  > These can be made on demand Yes and no. Also the ability to make diamond is pretty recent with a lot of the fundamental research having been funded by De Beers.

danmaz74 12y ago

Diamonds are an incredibly important status symbol, especially for women. That has value.

anakha 12y ago
Speaking of which, the linked article from The Atlantic in 1982 discusses why that is the case. http://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/1982/02/have-you-ever-tried-to-sell-a-diamond/304575/ http://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/1982/02/have-you...
rhizome 12y ago
That specific articulation of value is also a recent development: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jean_Baudrillard#The_object_value_system http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jean_Baudrillard#The_object_val...
zanny 12y ago
A completely arbitrary value that only requires a critical mass of women to being valuing some other arbitrary gauge of status as a surrogate. Consider how in the last few years owning Apple products has become its own perverse symbol of status, because Apple played an extremely effective rebranding campaign.
- rhizome 12y ago
  It's not arbitrary, though. Like all values, they are derived from an exchange. And to be fair, Apple's popularity is not only as a status symbol. For many people they provide a well-priced combination of features, sometimes extremely well-priced. A MacBook Air by any other company costs at least 50% more. If anything, your comment illustrates that Apple is saddled by their old reputation as having overpriced offerings, despite shifts of focus in their marketing campaigns.
deleted 12y ago
[deleted]