Slashdot Mirror


Diamonds & the RIAA

eaglebtc writes "After reading the previously-posted article on cdfreaks.com about the rapid erosion of cheap CDR's, I found another equally scintillating write-up about the economics of music CDs written by Richard Menta, founder of MP3 Newswire. Sure, we've all heard the whining about how CDs are so expensive, but Mr. Menta takes a unique perspective on the issue by comparing the RIAA to DeBeers. He argues that both companies control distribution of products in their respective markets with an iron fist, and by so doing can artificially raise prices. Coincidentally, the bubble is beginning to burst in both markets: the RIAA is fighting against the uprisings of P2P software, and the diamond cartel's lawyers are losing sleep over the $5 diamonds produced in a lab."

50 of 739 comments (clear)

  1. The names may change, but by teamhasnoi · · Score: 4, Funny
    no matter. DeBeers will try and lobby a solution to protect their market.

    If that doesn't work, I predict that your fiance will be expecting a new 'Mars rock' ring, and NASA will finally be able to finance that trip to the moon they've been faking^W talking about.

    1. Re:The names may change, but by the+MaD+HuNGaRIaN · · Score: 5, Informative

      Diamonds in jewelry are overrated any way.
      There are much prettier stones available, many with cool characteristics

    2. Re:The names may change, but by Planesdragon · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Try telling the girlfriend or the wife that though. They don't give a shit about corrupt, murderous, exploitative companies they just want that fucking iceberg on their finger so they can one-up their girl friends in the coffee house. It's a sad sad situation.

      Wait... you mean that you'd marry a girl like that?

      Damn.

      For the record, my wife doesn't even like diamonds. :) And if I told her all the @#$ that DeBeers does, she'd probably spread it like hot gossip.

    3. Re:The names may change, but by randyest · · Score: 4, Funny

      so then, if you choose to marry a boy, any one will do? ;)

      --
      everything in moderation
    4. Re:The names may change, but by pmz · · Score: 4, Interesting

      Uh. HOWTO would be appreciated.

      We knew eachother for years before we got married. We are best friends, and jewelry is hardly high on our list of priorities. We'd rather spend the money on a dishwasher or furniture, anyway.

      How is that so hard? Romantic idealism is overrated, IMO. I think long-term happiness is more easily obtained by fiscal responsibility, for example, than credit-supported fantasy. Perhaps I sound like an old fart, but that's just how I am.

    5. Re:The names may change, but by derch · · Score: 4, Insightful

      You're verging on incoherent, but you're looking for a place where there are women (*ahem* not girls) who don't like diamonds and/or who would reject a diamond because of its surrounding politics?

      Try any of the following:
      1) Local chapter of ACLU
      2) Local Amnestry group
      3) Local artist or arts school
      4) Any town with a healthy population of liberals

      It really says something about Slashdot that a moderater scored you as 'Insightful.' Such a sad, sad group of boys.

      Oo! Oo! Or you could try explaining your position to your fiancee. I recall learning somewhere that women are people who are as intelligent as guys. Assuming you're an intelligent guy, one would hope your fiancee is at least as intelligent as you are, and would share your concerns over blood diamonds.

    6. Re:The names may change, but by arnie_apesacrappin · · Score: 4, Interesting
      Did you see Bill Maher's newest comedy special? In it he discusses the methods used by the controlling groups in Africa to keep the villagers in the mines. He said that they go as far as to cut off the arms of small children to keep the adults working.

      He then recounts the time he told this to one of his female friends. He describes her as one of the nicest people you could ever meet. After telling her that the soldiers/work masters actually cut off the arms of small children, she made a sad face and said, "Both arms?"

      That shows you the power of diamonds.

      --

      Still, with a plan, you only get the best you can imagine. I'd always hoped for something better than that. -CP

    7. Re:The names may change, but by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Funny
      Try any of the following:
      1) Local chapter of ACLU
      2) Local Amnestry group
      3) Local artist or arts school
      4) Any town with a healthy population of liberals


      Maybe it's just me, but I assumed the original poster also wanted his potential fiancee to be intelligent and personable.
    8. Re:The names may change, but by Casca · · Score: 4, Funny

      Those are all excellent places to try, except all those girls already have girlfriends.

      --
      Casca
  2. What to get that special someone by pagluy · · Score: 5, Funny

    The latest Metallica wrapped in a box of of lab fabricated diamonds. Total cost? $100 Having your headbanging girlfriend love you forever? Priceless

  3. Labor Of Love by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful
    $5 diamonds shouldn't be a threat. You can already get cheap crystals that look as good (or better) than diamonds. The whole point of diamonds is their expensiveness itself. Your bride wants you to spend a lot of money committing to her so she can trust you: she wants to know that you'll be around to help raise the kid before she accepts your seed. Cheap diamonds completely miss the point.

    If guys start wedding gals using cheap diamonds, then chicks will just find a new tool with which to implement Expensive Labor of Love strategy.

    1. Re:Labor Of Love by spencerogden · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Yeah, but diamonds weren't super popular even 50 years ago, people still got married.

    2. Re:Labor Of Love by Gothmolly · · Score: 5, Funny

      I've had plenty of chicks ready and willing to accept my seed after $10 worth of cheap vodka. All you diamond buyers are suckers.

      --
      I want to delete my account but Slashdot doesn't allow it.
    3. Re:Labor Of Love by MKalus · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Yeah well, not being from the US (North America)I never quite understood that tradition, for ten grand I knew better things to do than buy a ring.

      But then that's just me (and pretty much anybody else I know who didn't grow up in the US / Canada).

      --
      If you want to e-mail me, use my PGP Key.
    4. Re:Labor Of Love by oliphaunt · · Score: 5, Funny

      What I'd like to see is a return to the days where women came with a dowry. Yes, I'll still buy her a ring that costs $X,000 and her parents will still spend $YZ,000 on a fancy wedding- but they will also give ME a check for $50,000 because they don't have to support her any longer.

      Or if not a check, at least some cattle or some other form of livestock.

      If the engagement ring is two months' salary, the dowry should be 20% of the value of the parents' net worth.

      --




      Humpty Dumpty was pushed.
    5. Re:Labor Of Love by rsilvergun · · Score: 4, Interesting

      If you look at the history of the 'tradition' it wasn't started to make sure they guy had money/commitment, it was a marketing ploy by the diamond insdustry. That whole 'three month's salary' stuff is just a load of crap to make these bastards rich. Point is there really is no long standing diamond giving tradition, and the only thing backing up that 'tradition' is marketing. A $5 diamond can be marketed as well as a $15,000 one.

      And besides, have you ever been married? With or without diamond wives freakin' expensive!

      --
      Hi! I make Firefox Plug-ins. Check 'em out @ https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/youtube-mp3-podcaster/
    6. Re:Labor Of Love by Jucius+Maximus · · Score: 5, Informative
      "Yeah well, not being from the US (North America)I never quite understood that tradition, for ten grand I knew better things to do than buy a ring."

      The DeBeers marketing campaigns are brilliant. If you are exposed to them from a young age and see fictional weddings on TV and how they focus on the ring, you will understand. It is ground into North American minds from the very beginning. Most people in North America know what I'm talking about when I refer to the "A Diamond is Forever Music."

    7. Re:Labor Of Love by DickBreath · · Score: 4, Funny

      The whole point of diamonds is their expensiveness itself. Your bride wants you to spend a lot of money committing to her so she can trust you: she wants to know that you'll be around to help raise the kid before she accepts your seed. Cheap diamonds completely miss the point.

      Talk about illogical nonsense.

      If you spend a fortune on a diamond so that you can be in the poor house when it comes to raising the kids, does this make sense? Or would you rather have a $5 piece of rock and lots of other money to invest in raising offspring.

      (Personal opinion follows, not for flames...) This is the kind of thinking I expect from females. It is part of their master plan to remove all joy from the universe.

      --

      I'll see your senator, and I'll raise you two judges.
  4. Synthetic diamonds by Eric(b0mb)Dennis · · Score: 4, Interesting

    ...are 'too' perfect, and still (sort-of) detectable when looking at earth-mined stones..

    De Beers has been trying to 'educate' the diamond masses about these 'heretic' stones, but eventually, this will bankrupt them

    Now, as for the RIAA, CD-Rs and file-sharing won't kill the music industry. I wouldn't even expect a drop in sale-price, just more and more bureaucratic nonsense.

    --
    Excuse me, I don't mean to impose, but I am the ocean
  5. Darn by Stargoat · · Score: 4, Funny

    I knew I should have waited two more years before getting engaged!

    --
    Hoist Number One and Number Six.
  6. DeBeers never promised by BWJones · · Score: 5, Interesting

    However, unlike the RIAA, DeBeers never promised that the prices of their diamonds would come down when market forces and economies of scale entered. Remember when CD's first became available? I can remember saving my change so I could afford some of the first CD's that came onto the market at what.....$15-20? Did the price on those ever come down? No.

    --
    Visit Jonesblog and say hello.
  7. Dogbert at the jewellery store by Jucius+Maximus · · Score: 5, Funny

    Dogbert: So you're telling me that if I give you thousands of dollars, you'll give me a pebble you found on the ground?
    Store Owner: These are not just ordinary rocks! They're precious and virtually priceless diamonds!
    Dogbert: That's only because you chose to restrict the supply.
    Store Owner: Ok Ok you figured us out. I'll give you a bag of diamonds if you'll keep quiet.

    (Dogbert walking away with a bag of diamonds)

    Dogbert: Well now I'm a party to this dirty little secret...

  8. control is the problem by 514x0r · · Score: 4, Informative

    the problem i've had with riaa for a while now is the discrepency between cost and sell. if a cd costs several times less to produce than a cassette, why does a recorded cd cost up to twice as much. perceived value. incidentally i used to be the IT manager for a jewelry wholesaler and it opperates much the same way there.....and they are getting boned over these lab diamonds

    --

    !(^((ri)|(mp))aa$)
  9. De Beers by El · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Also note that no DeBeers executives have set foot on American soil in several years -- there afraid they will be arrested for their monopolistic practices! So why don't we treat RIAA the same way? Oh, they're headquartered in the US and contribute a lot more to political campaigns...

    --

    "Freedom means freedom for everybody" -- Dick Cheney

  10. Artificial Scarcity by Hamfist · · Score: 4, Insightful

    They are similar becuase of artificially created scarcity. We are moving into an age of plenty. We can already print real objects using a modofied inkjet. It shouldn't be too long (compared to the time between the printing press and the computer) until our computers can produce most anything we want from a pile of atoms.

    The better question is, what becomes scarce? Knowledge? Art? Service technicians for replication devices? I've yet to hear a good answer. The elimination of scarcity throws our entire economic model out the window. What's the new model? Do we go Star Trek and only care about improving ourselves?

    1. Re:Artificial Scarcity by Telastyn · · Score: 4, Interesting

      Energy.

      All these things need power, and all of these things will be developed before good solar power harnessing is implimented [thus practically eliminating that scarcity]

    2. Re:Artificial Scarcity by vDave420 · · Score: 4, Insightful
      Ya know, you have hit the nail on the head!

      My last post touched on the same ideas: We are moving out of the age of "scarcity-based value" quite rapidly.

      It won't be long before you can "print" nearly everything from its atomic components.

      We all (as a society) need to carefully consider the implications of the framework we are laying down now:
      Single-entity (human, or worse: corporate) monopolistic control of "information" or "Intellectual Property" is leading towards the "worse" end of the spectrum, at least as far as I am concerned.

      Call me a hippie, but I'm not.
      Call me a communist, but I'm not.
      Call me a StarTrek nut, but I'm not.
      Call me anything you wish, but I firmly believe that everyone has an inherant (natural) right to use any and all information that enters their person.

      This may be too over-the-top for most people, but:
      Everyone has a inherant, 'natural' right to use information, including EMF radiation (radio/television signals passing *through* your body), genetic encodings (God help you, Monsonto!), Clever C++ code implementations (patented or not), or whatever.

      We need to take back control of our information!


      -dave-

      Shameless plug:
      Use BearShare for all your peer-to-peer needs!

      --
      The pig browse. With Google. Sigh is to the chicken. Chicken is fool. Giggle. The DailyWTF giggle.
  11. It's more about awareness than technology by nanojath · · Score: 4, Interesting
    Even more so than print publishing, for a long time music production has been available on a massively scalable level to the independent artist. (Someone can go off about how much it really costs to produce an album, because your cousin's girlfriend's dad is in the biz and... Okay, you can record an album that somebody will burn to CD from anywhere from tens of dollars to hundreds of thousands. Doesn't change the fact that 99% of what the conventional industry produces sounds like it was extruded from a tube.)


    Diamonds are a rotten analogy because it suggests that, up to now and the magic golden age of P2P, the publishing industry posessed all of the real music. The only thing that really distinguishes their product is that it is so obvious. If you never want to buy a major label release again but want new music all the time it really is not hard at all to do. It just involves a little more work.


    There are two ways in which the internet may create a revolution for independent musicians. One is by offering a viable replacement for radio. The second is by exposing music to the distributed filtering techniques of mass exposure and moderation that the internet essentially gave rise to the invention of. File sharing as such strikes me as something that will be much of an adjunct to the real 21st century revolution of music - assuming it really happens because it sure hasn't yet.

    --

    It Is the Nature of Information to Transgress Artificial Boundaries

  12. Re:They aren't so worried about $5 synthetics by Dirtside · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Not sure if you noticed, but that article in The Atlantic was written in 1982. (At least, that's the copyright date on the article. The fact that it doesn't mention any events that occurred after 1981 is telling, as well.)

    I don't know whether those $1.5 billion worth of diamonds are still sitting in Israeli banks, but I wouldn't bet on it.

    --
    "Destroy science and religion. Science would re-emerge exactly the same; but not religion." - Penn Jillette, paraphrased
  13. RIAA & CD Sales are hand in hand, kind of... by phaetonic · · Score: 5, Informative

    Did you know that there is a 2% surcharge on all CD recorders sold that goes directly to the RIAA, and a 2% hidden tax associated with the AHRA that is collected by the RIAA to give to artists, yet only roughly 36% of that 2% goes to the artist. www.boycott-riaa.com

  14. Industrial quality? by A+nonymous+Coward · · Score: 5, Informative

    You aren't paying attention. Previous artificial diamonds are too small for gems, they are used as abrasives in drill bits and so on.

    These new companies are not making diamond dust, they are making gem size diamonds, and plan to use the income from that, as they destroy deBeers, to finance making diamonds for semiconductors, as in huge wafers.

    Maybe you could come up with some definition for "industrial" diamonds, whatever that is, and then update it for the new artificial diamonds, and realize it has no more meaning.

  15. Re:How *could* it work? by Frenchy_2001 · · Score: 5, Insightful

    The fact is that De Beers is playing the sentimental trump. They are doing all they can to separate the "natural" diamonds from the "articifial" ones. They spent millions over the year to make every wife in every occudental country dream about a clear stone on her finger. They very wisely chose their sloga nas "a diamond last foreever" and are turning it around by saying the for a proof of forever love, you should give a gem that took forever to mature. Those people are very smart and very skilled at protecting their monopoly. Moreover, they are not over a bit of illegality and extortion if it can help them. They will hammer into our heads that the only good diamand are the "real" ones. Will it work? Time will tell... Anyway, diamond semiconductor might be a better outlet for thos artificial diamonds anyway...

  16. Don't want to give DeBeers money? by Mr.+Flibble · · Score: 4, Informative

    So, lets say you have to buy a ring*, but you don't want to give DeBeers money. I suggest you buy Moissanite ring. Myself, when faced with that decision, I bought a Tanzanite ring because my honey likes Tanzanite, and I hate DeBeers.

    True, Diamonds won't be expensive for long, and Moissanite is cheaper now, and may eventually cost more than diamond. But, Moissanite is harder than Ruby, and has a greater luster than diamond, and it also costs about 1/10 of what diamond does today.

    * One day, you will find a nice little woman who wants a ring, and generally it is best to get her one! ;)

    --
    Try to hack my 31337 firewall!
  17. "Intellectual Property" is forever(?) by Uncle+Op · · Score: 4, Interesting
    Last I knew, you couldn't copyright a diamond. But you could hold on to it, and, if you didn't let it get stolen, damaged, or lost, you could sell it to someone else. So it could be a one time inheritance boon if your estate is otherwise meager and your heirs aren't sentimental. Which is why the Diamond Folk work in sentiment, too, so you don't see every dead woman's engagement ring on the aution block. And even if she and her son wouldn't mind, how many women want to wear Mommy-in-law's rocks? Instead, folk go out and buy a new diamond.

    CDs aren't forever, but the force of copyright means that if you cut a Big Hit(tm), you and your heirs can have a recurring revenue stream for a long time, along with all the fat, balding, over-40 WASPs who are the bulk of the middlemen pushing your work. So RIAA wants to hawk as many "legit" jewels as they can without someone undercutting them. That you can buy some DRM'd songs and can't transfer them to a new system. Hard to find anyone against the concept of playing a "used" MP3 on their system, right?

  18. Help the RIAA - Not a Troll by bgp4 · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Wowzers, if that subject line doesn't get me mod'd down, I don't know what will.

    So, the RIAA's issue is they haven't yet found a way to make money off of file sharing. If there was money in it, they'd be fostering it, not trying to kill it.

    So, they're pursuing two directions right now. Fight tooth and nail to protect their current bread and butter (CD sales). They're not doing this for the artists... lord no, they're doing this for the labels. THe other direction they're going is trying to find new sources of revenue. NOTE: This new source must be as large if not larger than the existing stream (from a margin perspective).

    Once they find a way to make money on filesharing, I bet two things happen. a) they stop harrassing folks and b) CD prices drop b/c they're no longer a one trick pony.

    Sooooo... in an effort to stop the lawsuits and help get CD prices down, we, the buying public, need to find a way for the RIAA/labels to make billions off of online file sharing... hopefully without some terrible DRM integrated into the solution.

    There have been many attempts... the $0.99 downloads are the most recent and most successful... but they're still not much compared to the brick and mortor sales that are occuring.

    Put your heads together! Come up with a feasible way for the RIAA to migrate to a new business model and make all our lives easier.

    I dare you.. find a hole in this logic ;)

    --
    I'm down with that, as it were
  19. Re:They aren't so worried about $5 synthetics by zeroclip · · Score: 5, Funny

    Here on slashdot we read the article before making a coomm.. oh uh.. no thats right.

  20. Re:Taco needed $5 Diamonds by El · · Score: 5, Funny

    Pretty easy to duck bullets when nobody's shooting anywhere even remotely near you...

    --

    "Freedom means freedom for everybody" -- Dick Cheney

  21. Re:They aren't so worried about $5 synthetics by torpor · · Score: 4, Interesting


    They're worried about the yellow diamonds that are now capable of being reproduced, in extremely large sizes, in extremely good quality. These are not 'just' industrial diamonds - these are extremely high quality, extremely pure, large diamonds which can be grown by two different independent research groups right now, using extremely high pressure systems that have been in development for years.

    The yellows are at the very top end of the scale, and are something DeBeers has been cultivating as a market for years - now they're reproducable, and lab-made yellows are higher quality than anything DeBeers can muster.

    DeBeers deserves to go down. There is no better example of corporate evil.

    --
    ; -- the corruption of government starts with its secrets. a truly free people keep no secrets. --
  22. International collusion by siskbc · · Score: 4, Insightful
    DeBeers dosn't have a total monopoly on diamonds now

    They don't need it. They control more of the diamond market than OPEC does oil, but look what OPEC is able to do. To control a market, you need three things:

    1. You are the largest player in the market, with a high total market share,

    2. You have a large oversupply of the product,

    3. You have the ability to crash prices by releasing your oversupply.

    So what happens if someone mining diamonds were to challenge de Beers? de Beers would make sure that their network of retailers don't do business with that producer. They'd also release some of their capacity to temporarily drop prices. That would put that producer out of business.

    The artificial boys are different, because they can make stuff cheaper even than de Beers can get it out if they dropped their prices as much as possible, probably.

    What will probably happen is that lab-grown diamonds will still be very scarce. The people making them are being very secretive about their processes and even their identities. They could sell their diamonds for $6 or $6,000, what do you think they'll do?

    That's true. Both have a vested interest in keeping prices high. What *should* happen is they should get a deal together where they divide the pie, with neither side stepping over it. Kind of like OPEC. If they did it in the US, it would be collusion, but they don't have to do that. We'll see.

    --

    -Looking for a job as a materials chemist or multivariat

  23. Market data concurs with Menta's analysis by tagishsimon · · Score: 4, Informative
    At the risk of karma whoring ... since I posted much the same story a couple of days ago ... the latest market data in the UK suggests that reducing the bloated price of CDs increases sales (wow) to - for the UK- record high levels (gosh, who'd have thought in the year of Kazaa that we'd see record CD sales?).

    The RIAA's "xxx's is killing music" (substitute cassettes, P2P, MP3, whatever comes next) is somewhat undermined by all of this.

    Menta makes the point that CDs are priced by the big five at the point that maximises profit. No surprise then to hear that whilst UK CD sales were up by 3%, profit was down by 2%.

  24. One Week Only!! by PetoskeyGuy · · Score: 5, Funny

    Does your Cartel seem destined to fail in future markets. It's time you learned how to succeed. The Very Successful Drug Cartels will be having a convention this fall. Don't let your Cartel go the way of the Railroad Express!

    Choose any of these great topics...
    ... Extortion
    ... Bribery
    ... Price Fixing
    ... Secret Pricing
    ... Lobbying
    ... Obtaining cheap 3rd World Labor
    ... Becoming a government monopoly

    and for the truly abitious
    ... Murder, Mayhem and Intimidation
    ... Finding the trouble makers
    ... Going Multi-National
    ... End Competition for Good!

    Sign up now for priority seating. Check our some of our current well known registered participants.

    Music - RIAA
    Video - MPAA
    Diamonds - DeBeers
    Oil - OPEC

    Don't start a Cartel without checking out this conference. Only one Cartel per Industry please.

  25. Give a RIAA CD to your girlfriend... by leoboiko · · Score: 5, Funny

    ...because copyrights are forever!

    --
    Prescriptive grammar:linguistics :: alchemy:chemistry. Stop being a nazi and learn some science.
  26. Linares' patent for vapor deposition by Kazymyr · · Score: 5, Informative

    Just in case anyone is interested, here's a link to the patent Linares received for their vapor process.

    --
    I hadn't known there were so many idiots in the world until I started using the Internet -Stanislaw Lem
  27. misunderstanding... by gosand · · Score: 4, Funny
    I've had plenty of chicks ready and willing to accept my seed after $10 worth of cheap vodka. All you diamond buyers are suckers.

    "Fuck off, loser" doesn't mean they are ready and willing to accept your seed(ling).

    --

    My beliefs do not require that you agree with them.

  28. DeBeers has been much more effective than RIAA by sd_jeff · · Score: 5, Informative

    Not sure how things have changed in the last 20 years since this article came out, but here's an interesting piece on how dimaond engagement rings are an invented tradition that only started 60 years ago. (It's comes in three parts b/c it's pretty long.)

    part 1

    part 2

    part 3

  29. More info on Diamonds by dinog · · Score: 5, Informative
    Available at PBS.

    DeBeers is an even bigger fraud than the RIAA. Diamonds (even natural ones) are not really scarce. Also, the new lab methods do not all rely on the mettalic solvents to create diamonds. One is deposited as plasma, with no extra gunk in the process. They are white diamonds, of unusual perfection.

    BTW, Plastic had this a few weeks ago.

    Dean G.

  30. Where to place the overpriced CD's by Darth+Hubris · · Score: 4, Funny

    I saw the title and immediately thought: If you shoved the overpriced CD's up the RIAA's asses, in a week you'd get diamonds.

    --
    The party's over ... the drink ... and the luck ... ran out
  31. the difference is... by jpc · · Score: 4, Informative

    the people who run De Beers never enter the USA because they will be arrested for running an illegal cartel. Europe has a few De Beers shops now (not sure why we think they are legal). I think it was a judgement 10 or 20 years ago that the diamond cartel was illegal, dont remember the exact details, but it comes up quite often, becasue it is difficult to run a large multinational without ever going to the USA

  32. Re:strong-arm power by siskbc · · Score: 4, Insightful
    You're playing right into the de Beers bullshit by referring to the synthetic diamonds as 'fake.'

    I'm a chemist, I know what they are, but "fake" is four letters and "synthetic" is 9. I give the average slashdotter credit for the intelligence to discern the difference, though perhaps that's overstating things.

    On the day when 'authentic' diamond merchants are frantically shipping their stones with a crappy little scrap of paper with a hologram on it, like an Franklin Mint ripoff item, life will be better for common sense people.

    They already laser-inscribe the more valuable ones with a serial number. The easy bit for the manufacturers of fake diamonds is going for the small-diamond market. As the article says, anything under 1/5 carat isn't worth verifying. And you can make a $10,000 diamond-encrusted bracelet with a bunch of diamonds that are, individually, not worth enough to check. And that will be a nightmare for de Beers to control.

    --

    -Looking for a job as a materials chemist or multivariat

  33. This is gonna feel good... by sillypixie · · Score: 5, Interesting

    Wow, it isn't like all us Slashdot posters are judgemental, or anything... As a GIRL who is a GEEK and relatively socially conscious, but also a DIAMOND owner, I guess I really represent the minority here (-: Let's see here: 1) Some smart women like diamonds. I swear. In fact, I know quite a few of them personally. 2) If you are really planning to meet girls based on their gem preferences, you are a LOSER. 3) Canadian diamonds are a very cool alternative - they come with a lasered serial number and logo on the girdle of the diamond - perfect for us tech-geek girls 4) I personally had no desire to have a diamond when we first started ring shopping, but it was my husband-to-be who felt it was a good idea - so don't give me all that bullshit that the guys can see through the marketing stuff, while the girls dreamily suck it all in. 5) I would take an artificial diamond over a real one in a second - a symbol of technological acheivement and science - that sparkles? It's perfect!

    --
    don't mess with those geekgrrls