Slashdot Mirror


Lab Created Diamonds Come to Market

E writes "Technology is putting some new sparkle in the world of diamonds. Until recently, naturally occurring, mined diamonds were unchallenged in their quality and desirability. But now laboratory-created diamonds, which possess the same properties as naturals, are poised to give them a run for their money. A new company, Adia Diamonds, has quite the variety in their inventory. They have the same chemical and physical properties as a mined diamond and come in white, blue and yellow. Both GIA and EGL grading labs are offering certifications for lab created diamonds. Seems like a good, high-tech alternative to the DeBeers diamond cartel."

119 of 578 comments (clear)

  1. Real importance beyond jewelry? by dada21 · · Score: 5, Interesting

    The article hints more at the new synthetic process' value for jewelry, but I'm not so certain that most jewelers will appreciate it -- especially the jewelers that cater to the most extravagent tastes. Diamonds have always been an oddity for me -- I understand the diamond's purpose in industrial applications (drill bits, saw blades, abrasives, and even in semiconductors) but the De Beers Group situation is not one I've ever understood -- even when trying to "think like a lady."

    I'm guessing the De Beers Group isn't worried about these synthetic diamonds, either -- they have such a great relationship with most jewelers because the De Beers Group spends a LOT of money in how they market the diamonds: marketing that provides diamonds for the bling-bling rappers, the royal families, the Hollywood stars and whoever else needs something sparkling to wear in public. That's what the jewelers want: they don't care if it's cheap, they get a great marketing campaign and still make huge profit margins.

    From Adia's website, we see only one retailer that resells their diamonds. Here's a company that has been around a few years, and they don't have a lot of support.

    For industrial applications, though, is the De Beers Group really a powerhouse? I'd always heard that a lot of flawed diamonds end up in the industrial applications, and the flawed ones are significantly cheaper than the "perfect" clarity versions used in jewelry.

    As a sidenote, my lady doesn't wear diamonds unless they're family heirlooms -- I've gotten her to move to 22K and 24K gold jewelry. It is shiny, sparkles like crazy if cut right, and when it wears down, I have it swapped for a new piece of jewelry in any Indian neighborhood (or in India) for a relatively competitive price. Diamonds are sort of boring for her now -- she sees how little they store value over time versus gold, and they're not very useful in a financial emergency (versus gold or platinum). Plus the fact that she can "trade-up" her softened jewelry for something else really captivates her -- the last ring she wore we "exchanged" for a set of earrings that was traded for bangles a few years later. With the diamond, she's mostly stuck.

    1. Re:Real importance beyond jewelry? by WindBourne · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Actually, De Beers is terrified. Over the last decade, they have pushed "genuine diamonds". Cool. A good jeweler and a bit testing could determine the difference between natural and artificial. Note, that I do not call it real vs. fake. The reason is, that they are both real. The problem is that the new artificial are not only indistinguishable, but it appears that better larger ones may be available soon for less than the cheaper "real" ones. De Beers would LOVE to kill these folks. But it is way too late for that. All in all, an investment in a diamond mine or even in a diamond ring may be a very bad investment. OTH, a nice gold ring may be a good one. In particular, if it has some disappearing scribbling inside.

      --
      I prefer the "u" in honour as it seems to be missing these days.
    2. Re:Real importance beyond jewelry? by BJH · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Interestingly enough, it IS possible to distinguish the new artifical diamonds from natural ones.

      The artificial ones have fewer impurities and inclusions ;)

    3. Re:Real importance beyond jewelry? by Dun+Malg · · Score: 4, Informative
      Actually, De Beers is terrified. Over the last decade, they have pushed "genuine diamonds". Cool. A good jeweler and a bit testing could determine the difference between natural and artificial.
      No, there is no non-destructive* way to reliably tell man made diamond from mined based on any material characteristics. The only way even a "good jeweler" can tell the difference is by checking for the official De Beers registry number laser etched on one of the facet edges. All part of their "genuine diamond" propaganda campaign. "Fake" diamonds are not registered.

      * mass spectrometry might do it by detecting certain trace elements, but in the end all diamonds are nothing more than tetrahedrally bonded carbon.
      --
      If a job's not worth doing, it's not worth doing right.
    4. Re:Real importance beyond jewelry? by eln · · Score: 5, Insightful

      A diamond ring has always been a bad investment, because the same marketing push that has been so successful at convincing everyone that diamonds are somehow rare and valuable have also convinced people that second-hand diamonds are nearly worthless. You will never get anywhere near what you paid for a diamond ring on the secondary market unless you happen to have a diamond with some historic significance.

      The DeBeers story, and the history of the diamond as jewelry, is simply the story of the most successful marketing campaign in history. It is simply astonishing how the DeBeers cartel has managed to turn a fairly ordinary (but shiny) stone into one of the most expensive, sought after stones around. A stone that is so valuable that not only is it worth 2 MONTHS salary, but is so personal that it should never be purchased second hand.

    5. Re:Real importance beyond jewelry? by Jane+Q.+Public · · Score: 2, Informative

      That is simply not so: inclusions and crystal imperfections scatter light. They can be found visually (with magnification) and by spectral or refractive examination. Those are material characteristics, or dependent upon material characteristics. As for spectrometry, that is almost completely useless, since natural and man-made diamonds (at least the good ones) are made entirely of the same material. Most of those with a significant amount of impurities can be identified with the naked eye.

    6. Re:Real importance beyond jewelry? by _KiTA_ · · Score: 5, Interesting
      I'm guessing the De Beers Group isn't worried about these synthetic diamonds, either -- they have such a great relationship with most jewelers because the De Beers Group spends a LOT of money in how they market the diamonds: marketing that provides diamonds for the bling-bling rappers, the royal families, the Hollywood stars and whoever else needs something sparkling to wear in public. That's what the jewelers want: they don't care if it's cheap, they get a great marketing campaign and still make huge profit margins.


      Actually, there was an article on /. about this a long time ago (3+ years?) when this tech first started really taking off. It mentioned two technologies, 1 which was basically putting carbon in a box and crushing the holy living out of it, another which was taking a slice of diamond and "growing" new diamond on top of it with essentially carbon "rain." -- then taking a slice of the new, artificial diamond and growing more diamond on that.

      One of the guys reported getting repeated death threats by people he traced back to De Beers, attacked at Trade Shows, attempts at blackmailing them into selling or destroying the tech, etc. DeBeers was offering free devices for dealers to detect these diamonds (they're TOO perfect, chemically, some deformations that should be there are not), etc. At the end of it all there was a diamond dealer who examined the synth diamonds and basically said "eh, my customers wouldn't care that it's synthetic, they just want a diamond."

      Basically DeBeers was freaking RIGHT out about the whole thing. Small wonder since they keep such a stranglehold on the diamond trade using whatever legal (and illegal) pracitices they can get away with.
    7. Re:Real importance beyond jewelry? by Jack+Pallance · · Score: 4, Funny

      I wonder if they might collaborate with Microsoft to setup a Windows based website for people to verify their diamond activation codes. They could call it the "DeBeers Genuine Advantage". Or maybe I heard that somewhere else.

    8. Re:Real importance beyond jewelry? by ravenshrike · · Score: 5, Informative

      Ding!. The DeBeers cartel has over a 400 yrs supply of diamond stock. If artificial diamond tech takes off and they can't get a stranglehold, that stock becomes essentially worthless.

    9. Re:Real importance beyond jewelry? by Joebert · · Score: 4, Funny

      When you really stop to think about it, the diamonds themselves ARE activation codes. ;)

      --
      Wanna fight ? Bend over, stick your head up your ass, and fight for air.
    10. Re:Real importance beyond jewelry? by Hawkxor · · Score: 4, Informative

      Artificial diamonds now have of these impurities added, just so that they can be indistinguishable (except for some trace elements, as mentioned). There is no jeweler that could tell them apart - and de beers has resorted to putting id tags on their diamonds for this very reason.

    11. Re:Real importance beyond jewelry? by SpinyNorman · · Score: 3, Interesting

      According to this article on the EGL webiste, DeBeer's DaimondView system is able to use ultraviolet imaging to deteect the different growth patterns of natural vs lab made diamonds.

      http://www.eglcanada.ca/media/ScooponSynthetics.pd f

      Also, gemstone inclusions are very characteristic. I'm not sure about diamonds, but for some stones such as (natural) ruby a lab can tell you which country it came from, and maybe even which mine.

    12. Re:Real importance beyond jewelry? by Ubergrendle · · Score: 4, Informative

      10 Reasons never to accept a diamond, published in The Economist.

      And then of course, the classic Atlantic article about the DeBeers Diamond cartel, and how the manufacture need.

      If diamonds are so special, how come they're 20x more common than sapphires but come at such a high premium?

      --
      John Maynard Keynes: "When the facts change, I change my mind. What do you do?"
    13. Re:Real importance beyond jewelry? by Jane+Q.+Public · · Score: 5, Interesting

      This may be true, but if so it is also completely asinine.

      Diamond prices are based almost completely on the various measures of quality. Other than cut, those measures are entirely determined by the purity (lack of trace elements), and the "flawlessness" of the crystal. Flawlessness weighs very heavily in the price calculation.

      Adding imperfections to make the diamond look "natural" is equivalent to shooting oneself in the foot; it defeats the whole purpose. The existing controllers of the diamond markets may try to shift prices toward "natural" diamonds, but as you and others have stated that can be faked too. So any such action would be a finger in the dike with a tsunami on the way. Thanks, but if it were me I would rather stand clear.

    14. Re:Real importance beyond jewelry? by bigberk · · Score: 3, Interesting

      Indeed, De Beers is a success based on marketing genius and supply side control (to fix prices to arbitrarily high values). The 2 months salary figure you mention was an etiquette rule created by De Beers, a wise benchmark to set the 'value' of diamonds. This 'rule' (which was a marketing creation) has been so successfully disseminated that it is now part of culture and tradition.

    15. Re:Real importance beyond jewelry? by mottie · · Score: 4, Informative

      the story of the most successful marketing campaign in history

      Right you are.. and here's the book to prove it:

      The Diamond Invention

    16. Re:Real importance beyond jewelry? by boethius78 · · Score: 4, Interesting

      Close. Add a serial number, and insist that the higher quality lab created diamonds are fake. I'm guessing the next step is to stop supplying natural diamonds to jewellers that insist on selling 'fake' diamonds, and hey presto, we're back to the old DeBeers cartel. Hurray for bullying international corporations. Where would we be without them? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Debeers#Laboratory_cr eated_diamonds

    17. Re:Real importance beyond jewelry? by Joebert · · Score: 4, Funny

      Let me rephrase that, "Pussy activation codes".
      Don't get busted trying to use a fake one, you think Microsoft can be a bitch to deal with ?

      --
      Wanna fight ? Bend over, stick your head up your ass, and fight for air.
    18. Re:Real importance beyond jewelry? by Antique+Geekmeister · · Score: 2

      They can, and have, undersold new diamond miners and put them right out of business by dumping, then jacking the prices back up later. We see the exact thing with other monopolies, such as Microsoft, where they will sell at a loss to prevent a competitor from entering a small market and getting a toehold, and where they will apply illegal behind-the-scenes pressure to prevent retailers from starting any business with a competitor.

      Killing the market for "conscript" diamonds also threatens some very dangerous people in the Ivory Coast, just as making artificial petroleum more cheaply would threaten some dangerous politcal groups. There are going to be deaths involved, I'm sure. But breaking these kinds of monopoly will free up a lot of repressed people, so they seem well worth it.

    19. Re:Real importance beyond jewelry? by hachete · · Score: 3, Interesting

      The last time I bought a diamond ring for my (ex-)wife, I had to return it because I divorced her. Now, even though I had the receipt the salesperson went through a process of some sort of "gun" with a light that shone into each diamond on the ring, and it went "beep" when a diamond was "genuine" - I think that's when it found some sort of unique mark. I think that debeers are now marking their diamonds to distinguish from the manufactured ones.

      IIRC, diamonds used to be prized *because* of their flawlessness. DeBeers now put out that it's the flaws which are the mark of a "better" diamond.

      So, debeers are crapping themselves and I can't feel that sorry about the situation.

      --
      Patriotism is a virtue of the vicious
    20. Re:Real importance beyond jewelry? by ehrichweiss · · Score: 2, Interesting

      "Diamonds are sort of boring for her now -- she sees how little they store value over time versus gold, and they're not very useful in a financial emergency (versus gold or platinum)."

      I think you are misunderstanding diamonds in this aspect. A diamond's value goes up a minimum of 12% per year regardless of market trends as opposed to gold which fluctuates according to some idiot's thoughts on inflation. Now let me clarify, that's NOT to say that a diamond RING will go up in value, just the unmounted diamond. That's where most people get confused because an unmounted diamond sells for a lot less than one mounted but when you try to sell a diamond ring back to a jeweler they offer you the unmounted price(sometimes not that much but their price is based on the appraised unmounted value) and maybe $5 for the ring itself so it appears as though the diamond's value has dropped. Befriend a jeweler and ask them if that's not the case. BTW, you can make money in gold but it's not a guaranteed thing. I have a friend who makes BANK buying used diamonds thanks to this knowledge.

      --
      0x09F911029D74E35BD84156C5635688C0
    21. Re:Real importance beyond jewelry? by alienw · · Score: 2, Informative

      No, this process just checks the refractive index and other simple things. A really good artificial diamond can only be distinguished from a mined one using very large and expensive equipment to check the impurity profile.

    22. Re:Real importance beyond jewelry? by odourpreventer · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Slightly OT (or not):

      A couple of years ago, a widow living in the US had her husband's remains cremated. She then flew over to Russia (at that time, Russian companies made the best synth diamonds) and had the ashes pressed to a diamond.

      I watched it on TV, so no link. Can't prove the story wasn't faked, but it was funny in a morbid sort of way.

    23. Re:Real importance beyond jewelry? by dhovis · · Score: 5, Informative

      Actually that tester tests the thermal conductivity of the stone. Cubic Zirconia is virtually indistinguishable from diamond. A really well trained gemologist can tell the difference some of the time, but not the people who work in jewelry stores.

      OTOH, diamond has a very high thermal conductivity and cubic zirconia does not. When CZ first hit the market, jewelers really flipped out, because people could buy diamond rings, replace the diamond with CZ, and then return the ring with the CZ for full price. At first, the only surefire test was to measure the density, but that required removing the stone from the setting, something that takes some time. The company that created CZ then also produced a tester which at its tip had a small heater and a temperature probe a little ways away. If you touch the tip to a diamond, heat will transfer from the heater to the probe, whereas with a CZ, it will not. The company made more money off the patent for the detector than they ever did off CZ.

      Of note, a few years back, a new lab-created diamond alternative hit the market: Moissanite. It is a form of silicon carbide, and it actually has a higher index of refraction than diamond (it sparkles more). It also has a high thermal conductivity, so it would fool the old testers. Moissanite is easier to distinguish from diamond under a loupe, however. It is birefringent.

      --

      --
      The internet is the greatest source of biased information in the history of mankind.

    24. Re:Real importance beyond jewelry? by Carnivore · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Or you could, you know, have a mutually respectful relationship and talk about it. A lot of women, especially the ones we slashdotters get involved with, are pretty reasonable. My wife and I decided that we didn't want to go anywhere near a diamond, and my efforts to have a chunk of meteor set into a custom ring didn't work out. She's an astronomer, so we both thought that the extraterrestrial setting would be cool.

      We ended up getting an "engagement computer"--she wanted a TiBook, and since it was about $2k, we thought that it was a funny joke.

      The whole wedding industry is a giant scam. If you are with a reasonable woman, you can dodge a lot of the crazy stupid extravagances and have a fun time instead. We got titainium wedding bands (custom designed by us in Autocad and made by Bruce Boone, who is awesome), her dress was custom made by a local seamstress for $200, we got married on a volcano in Arizona with 8 people, I grilled steaks for the reception. We're having parties in the Spring for all of the family friends and relatives who weren't at the ceremony.

      We had to go to the mall "ring shopping" to get our ring sizes. Some of the more complicated, but still not crazy, rings were hugely expensive--$3500 each!

      I know that a lot of women have been planning their weddings since they were 6. I also know that I'm really lucky. I'm trying to tell everyone that it is possible to have a fun wedding without giving DeBeers any money and not that much to the rest of the wedding industry. Fight the Man! And reason with the Woman!

    25. Re:Real importance beyond jewelry? by 14CharUsername · · Score: 2, Interesting
      De Beers would LOVE to kill these folks.

      Don't count this out. Investors in artificial diamond labs have been know to have accidents like "falling out of a helicopter".

    26. Re:Real importance beyond jewelry? by Mister+Transistor · · Score: 3, Informative

      The device was probably a "GemPrint" machine, a device that makes a laser scatter-graph of the diamond's reflection profile. Each cut makes each diamond provide a unique pattern when you shine a laser into it, and they use these to profile, catalog and serialize the diamond. You can see the scatter-graph of your diamond yourself by shining a laser pointer into the face of the diamond directly while pointing the diamond toward a wall (to avoid blinding yourself). The resulting pattern is very pretty and, of course, unique. One of my old roommates used to work for GemPrint aligning the machines, but that was a while ago - this sounds like a smaller more portable version.

      --
      -- You are in a maze of little, twisty passages, all different... --
    27. Re:Real importance beyond jewelry? by DavidTC · · Score: 4, Insightful

      They should care it wasn't pulled out of the earth.

      At gunpoint.

      From a mine where a war was waged to retain control of it.

      And polished by child slave labor in India.

      You shouldn't marry fucking retards who think a 'real diamond' is better. 'Real diamonds' and the DeBeer's cartel have caused hundreds of thousands of deaths over what, in reality, are just rocks.

      Carefully explain that you can pay X, and have a completely flawless rock, or you can pay X*5 and have a slightly flawed rock with the blood mostly washed off of it.

      --
      If corporations are people, aren't stockholders guilty of slavery?
    28. Re:Real importance beyond jewelry? by toleraen · · Score: 2, Funny

      Obviously, you aren't married. Second hand diamond exposure is a serious threat!

    29. Re:Real importance beyond jewelry? by CommandNotFound · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Absolutely I agree with you, and yes, you lucked out, although I had no problem giving in to the Man. It's only money, after all, and if she's happy, I'm happy. My wife is really sensible with money, e.g. "going out to eat" for her is a trip to Subway, unless it's a really special occasion. But even with sensible women like her, the princess image is strong, so I encouraged her to have the day her way. Diamond shopping is really crazy, the price differential for similar product can range over 100%, and the mall places are usually total ripoffs. Luckily there was a FAQ on the Net that I used to get educated, and it saved me a lot of money in relative terms. See my posting above regarding what kind of rings I would buy if it were up to me.

      Guys should be careful when going non-traditional, because most/many women will go along with it and convince themselves it's their idea too, when it's really the guy's idea, and he doesn't realize the hole he is digging for himself. :)

    30. Re:Real importance beyond jewelry? by Elaarni · · Score: 2, Informative

      But these new diamonds arent CZ, they are chemically identical to diamonds in every way

    31. Re:Real importance beyond jewelry? by Lord_Dweomer · · Score: 2, Insightful
      You shouldn't marry fucking retards who think a 'real diamond' is better.

      Correction: You shouldn't marry fucking retards who think a 'real diamond' is better PROVIDED they have been educated about the evils of DeBeers. The vast majority of women don't have a fucking clue that these are blood diamonds, or what a blood diamond even is. All they know is they want a status symbol that proves their man spends the big bucks on them.

      So before you propose to her, make sure you teach her about DeBeers, and guage her reaction. If she still wants a real diamond, THEN tell her to go find a guy who supports the suffering of others to provide her with one.

      --
      Buy Steampunk Clothing Online!
    32. Re:Real importance beyond jewelry? by kchrist · · Score: 2, Insightful
      Ever hear of the "two months salary" rule for engagement rings?

      That's not a "rule", it's a marketing slogan created by De Beers. They worked very hard to get that idea ingrained into western society and your repeating it would make them proud. You also shouldn't get "value" confused with "price" because where diamonds are concerned, there's no connection between the two.

      Nice generalizations, but it sounds to me like you're talking to the wrong women. I'm getting married next year and my SO doesn't want a diamond any more than I do.
    33. Re:Real importance beyond jewelry? by TheMysteriousFuture · · Score: 2, Informative

      http://www.cascadiadesignstudio.com/faq-cut-off-ri ng.htm

      In case of an emergency, such as an injured finger, Emergency Medical Technicians, Fire Departments, and Hospital Emergency Rooms can quickly remove titanium rings.

      We hear false claims from jewelry stores that titanium can't be cut. Many jewelers spread this rumor when titanium started to weaken their sales of more expensive bands. If titanium could not be cut and drilled, we wouldn't be able to make our rings using standard high-speed steel tools!

      --
      .sig
    34. Re:Real importance beyond jewelry? by smellsofbikes · · Score: 2, Interesting

      There are a bunch of possibilities, should you still want to get her an interesting ring some day.
      Tektites are generally believed to be glasses formed in the wake of meteor impacts. Many obsidians cool while falling through the air after a volcanic explosion. (Both are basically glass, and not very strong.) A decent machinist could cut a ring out of a chunk of nickel-iron meteorite, or it would be fairly easy to make a ring yourself by buying an existing gold wedding band and soldering a cabochon bezel setting onto it, and setting a cut and etched piece of nickel-iron meteorite in it. (I've done the latter a couple of times and they can be beautiful.)

      --
      Nostalgia's not what it used to be.
  2. Great! by Average_Joe_Sixpack · · Score: 5, Funny

    My Real Doll will never know the difference

    1. Re:Great! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Funny

      Wouldn't your Real Doll give you as much action with an onion ring too?

    2. Re:Great! by fyngyrz · · Score: 4, Funny

      You don't even want to know what can be done with a RealDoll(tm) and an onion ring... you can't handle the truth!

      --
      I've fallen off your lawn, and I can't get up.
    3. Re:Great! by zerocool^ · · Score: 2, Funny


      You do whatever you think is right with your Real Doll's O-Ring...

      --
      sig?
  3. anything is a good alternative to DeBeers by yagu · · Score: 5, Informative

    Lab manufactured diamonds is an interesting concept, but if DeBeers gets its metaphorical finger in machine, it will ensure these diamonds either never get manufactured, or if they are manufactured never hit the marketplace with the name "diamond". The DeBeers monopoly is too dear and too powerful for disruption like this.

    You can argue the "blood diamond" political aspects of the diamond mining industry, but even tossing that aside DeBeers' behavior and domination and control of the diamond industry transcends any other monopoly. There's a reason DeBeers isn't a U.S. company (among many others...), DeBeers' monopolistic practices and domination and heavy handed control of the diamond market would not likely pass legal muster in the U.S.

    If you ever get a chance (/. "girlfriend" jokes aside), buy the lab diamonds, or buy your to-be a genuinely rare gem such as a Ruby (diamonds are not rare).

    The sooner the myth that is diamonds is de-mythed, the better. Read more about diamond myths here.

    1. Re:anything is a good alternative to DeBeers by Roger+W+Moore · · Score: 4, Funny

      The sooner the myth that is diamonds is de-mythed, the better. Read more about diamond myths here.

      Actually they got the first point of the FAQ wrong - a diamond is not forever even if you do take care of it. It is a metastable allotrope of carbon and will slowly convert to the thermodynamically favoured allotrope, graphite. It might take several billion years for a diamond to decay into graphite but that is still a lot less than forever.

    2. Re:anything is a good alternative to DeBeers by alnjmshntr · · Score: 2, Interesting
      ...it will ensure these diamonds either never get manufactured, or if they are manufactured never hit the marketplace with the name "diamond". The DeBeers monopoly is too dear and too powerful for disruption like this.


      Rubbish, De Beers is hardly a monopoly any longer. Both Canadian and Australian diamond mines don't sell their diamonds to De Beers - and Canada is something like the 3rd largest diamond producer in the world, after Botswana and Russia.

      I seriously doubt De Beers (a South African company BTW) employs any more heavy handed tactics than many U.S companies. Sure they bribe the Russians to keep them loyal - but you're naive if you don't think bribery in all it's forms is not used by many large U.S companies as a business strategy.
      --
      If I had created the world I wouldn't have messed about with butterflies and daffodils. I would have started with lasers
    3. Re:anything is a good alternative to DeBeers by Mad+Dog+Manley · · Score: 2, Informative

      There are two major diamond mines in Canada, and De Beers is already linked (financially) to one of them so far.

  4. A great article on the subject by g_adams27 · · Score: 4, Informative

    Wired had a great article on the subject of synthetic diamonds a few years ago. An excerpt:

    Back at the Diamond High Council, I open the film canister and shake the Apollo stones onto the table. Van Royen tentatively picks one up with a pair of elongated tweezers and takes it to a microscope. "Unbelievable," he says slowly as he peers through the lens. "May I study it?" I agree to let him keep the gems overnight. When we meet the next morning in the lobby of the High Council, Van Royen looks tired. He admits to staying up almost all night scrutinizing the stones. "I think I can identify it," he says hopefully. "It's too perfect to be natural. Things in nature, they have flaws. The growth structure of this diamond is flawless."
    1. Re:A great article on the subject by onx · · Score: 5, Interesting

      From the wired article: "In an ambiguous April 2001 ruling, the Federal Trade Commission said that it was "unfair or deceptive" to call a man-made diamond a "diamond,""

      I agree completely with the FTC, it is very misleading to call a diamond a diamond! Man-made diamonds are identical to so called natural diamonds, differing only in the fact that natural diamonds are pulled out of the ground and man-made ones are not.

      I love our government.

    2. Re:A great article on the subject by jmichaelg · · Score: 2, Informative
      I love our government.

      Especially when one branch gives deBeers a favorable ruling like the FTC's while anothe branch, Department of Justice, has standing arrest warrents out for deBeers execs. Ever since the 80's, DOJ has been trying to charge deBeers with monopolostic practices but none of the officers will cooperate by setting foot on American soil.

  5. Technology has to work hard by LiquidCoooled · · Score: 3, Interesting

    These technological wonders are rare and unique, they need to ramp production to even come close.
    from the website:

    Only a handful of Adia diamonds are produced each month. To the contrary, natural diamonds have annual production rates of over 150,000,000 carats. Would you believe that they are rare?

    I'm just reading a fascinating site packed with diamond color info.

    Fascinating to see the histories of the famous natural diamonds, if they can get production close for clear ones it will be good.
    As a geek I cannot wait for a diamond processor.

    Is this the startings of the diamond age :)

    --
    liqbase :: faster than paper
  6. this is good on so many levels by circletimessquare · · Score: 5, Interesting

    -challenges one of the most egregious monopolies in the world: debeers

    -undermines the economic incentive for blood diamonds

    -removes the financial drive behind a classist symbol, the diamond ring

    -unlocks thousands of new technological and scientific advances, due to diamond's unique properties of hardness and optics, that were previously economically unfeasible

    a diamond is just carbon. a very common element. it's just arranged in particularly difficult to achieve crystal. not anymore

    on so many levels, in so many ways, when something that was previously scarce is now plentiful, the world has become a better place, progress has been achieved

    --
    intellectual property law is philosophically incoherent. it is your moral duty to ignore it or sabotage it
    1. Re:this is good on so many levels by HolyCrapSCOsux · · Score: 2, Informative

      mmm diamond Heat sinks...
      diamond has the best thermal conductivity of any solid
      but I wonder how they would form the fins...

      --
      0xB315AA8D852DCD3F3DCA578FD2E0BF88
  7. Press release? What the...? by thesolo · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Over 3 years ago, Slashdot ran an article on these lab created diamonds; it was a great story on Wired.com. The difference there was that it was an independent piece, a solid read, and offered a glimpse into the future of computing (i.e. using diamonds as semiconductors).

    This current story, however, is just a link to a damn press release, with no mention What was the point of it, aside from giving free press to this company?

  8. they're missing an element by macadamia_harold · · Score: 5, Funny

    Seems like a good, high-tech alternative to the DeBeers diamond cartel.

    Not really. They're missing an element; a human element. I expect bloodshed and slavery with my diamonds. They make the diamonds more special.

  9. Re:Natural Complexity by Dun+Malg · · Score: 4, Informative
    There's a reason why imitations (exempli gratia: CGI) lack that je ne sais quoi: we are unable to reproduce the complexity of naturally occuring systems.
    There is no difference whatsoever between a mined diamond and a man-made one (other than that the man made ones have fewer flaws). The is no "je ne sais quoi" that distinguishes one from the other. The reason man-made diamonds can't get traction is that the mined diamond suppliers have a very tight grip on the supply channel and synthetic diamonds are not available in large enough quantities for any large gem buyer to risk losing his place as a De Beers sightholder. The threat to the diamond mining industry is very real, though. De Beers is actively promoting the propaganda that man-made diamonds aren't "real"-- despite the fact that they're generally of higher quality in terms of clarity and uniformity.
    --
    If a job's not worth doing, it's not worth doing right.
  10. Much more detailed article by Gregoyle · · Score: 5, Informative

    Wired did a much more in depth article on this subject a couple years ago.

    One thing to keep in mind is that saying the lab-created diamonds possess the same qualities as natural diamonds is a little misleading. They are certainly diamonds, in that they are the same type of crystal form of carbon, but they *are* distinguishable from natural diamonds.

    What I find very interesting is just how expensive and advanced equipment needs to be to tell the difference, and how much Debeers is shelling out to ensure that the biggest diamond testing labs have that equipment. Check out the linked article for more on that.

    If you want to do something about challenging the DeBeers cartel and their questionable business practices, check out Canadian Diamonds, also here and here.

    --

    "He's more machine now than man, twisted and evil."

    1. Re:Much more detailed article by admactanium · · Score: 2, Informative
      I saw that and tried to buy one of these 'cultured' diamonds back then. The only man made diamonds you could buy were yellow, pink, etc. Sure, super rare, yada, yada, yada... but many months of looking you could not find the classic clear diamond. If folks are starting to sell the clear diamonds, this is big news.
      exactly. i've been doing this research myself as i'm smack-dab in the middle of the process of buying a diamond. the other company i looked into is apollo diamonds. i wrote them an email asking about their current inventory and they only sell clear diamonds up to half a carat. once these sythetic diamonds reach a point where they can produce >1ct diamonds in white then they'll start selling in droves. personally i'm really looking for a 1.25 carat or greater so these diamonds, which was very nice, are not right for what i'm looking for. i bet within a year or so they'll be there. it'll be interesting to see what the debeer's monopoly will do in reaction to gem quality >1ct white diamonds hitting the market. i bet their ad budget goes through the roof.
    2. Re:Much more detailed article by sustik · · Score: 2, Informative

      See: http://diamondnexuslabs.com/

      They have been selling clear man made diamonds for a year at least.

  11. Re:Natural Complexity by Frogbert · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Bullshit! "Imitations" as you call them are more pure then the naturally occurring ones. They are chemically perfect and there is absolutely no way you would be able to tell with the naked eye.

    It's FUD like yours that keeps DeBeers in business. The complexity you speak of is the diamonds imperfections.

  12. It's not love . . . by 93,000 · · Score: 5, Funny

    It's not really love unless a 12 year old lost a finger cutting it out of the wall of a mine.

    (Kudos to whomever I'm paraphrasing/ripping off in saying that -- I know it's not my own.)

  13. Indistinguishable? by Nefarious+Wheel · · Score: 5, Informative
    My late father was a jeweler and certified diamond rater (whatever that meant, but he studied hard for it). He said that all natural diamonds and sapphires, no matter how pure they look, have little inclusions and flaws in them. The way to tell them from the synthetic gems was that the synthetic gems were too perfect, and didn't have those microscopic flaws.

    He also told me how to tell an artificial pearl from a real one -- the real one, he said, will dissolve in vinegar. Strange sense of humor he had.

    --
    Do not mock my vision of impractical footwear
    1. Re:Indistinguishable? by Jane+Q.+Public · · Score: 5, Informative

      That was not a joke. Back in the day it was a relatively easy and useful way to tell a genuine batch of pearls from fakes. Take random samples and see if they would begin to dissolve.

      Of course you would not want to dissolve the whole pearl. That would be silly.

    2. Re:Indistinguishable? by WindBourne · · Score: 4, Interesting

      Bear in mind, that I am not a diamond guy, so it is interesting to hear you speak about it. 5 years ago, that was how they told the difference (as well as other tests). About 6 months ago, I read about a new class of diamonds coming from Russia and Florida (using the russian technology). Apparently the new ones can be designed to have flaws. The article said that DeBeers was trying to figure ways around this, but that they did not have one.

      I was about to ask if you would ask your father about this, but I just noticed the second word. I am sorry; hopefully, it was quick.

      --
      I prefer the "u" in honour as it seems to be missing these days.
    3. Re:Indistinguishable? by TubeSteak · · Score: 2, Informative
      Here's a thread (starting with my commentary on why diamonds are cheap for anything besides jewelry) from the "Pharaoh's Gem Brighter Than a Thousand Suns" story a while back.

      I had two followup posts.
      One of them says where you can buy man-made diamonds (guess you'd want to add http://www.adiadiamonds.com/ to the list)

      About 6 months ago, I read about a new class of diamonds coming from Russia and Florida (using the russian technology). Apparently the new ones can be designed to have flaws. The article said that DeBeers was trying to figure ways around this, but that they did not have one.
      The second followup sums up what I gathered from a PBS link (circa 2000) someone posted.

      Essentially, synthetic diamonds are UV reactive because their atomic structure is different from natural diamonds. The PBS documentary link said that this problem with atomic structures would soon be overcome.

      So AFAIK, right now, the only ways to tell synthetics from fakes are (A) they are flawless* or (B) they fluoresce.

      *A natural diamond is "flawless" if there are no visible flaws under 10x magnification. Synthetics are (I assume) literally flawless under much higher magnifications.
      --
      [Fuck Beta]
      o0t!
    4. Re:Indistinguishable? by anagama · · Score: 4, Informative
      So AFAIK, right now, the only ways to tell synthetics from fakes are (A) they are flawless* or (B) they fluoresce.

      Check it out:
      http://www.adiadiamonds.com/content/frequently-ask ed-questions/#fluorescence
      --
      What changed under Obama? Nothing Good
    5. Re:Indistinguishable? by jbrader · · Score: 4, Funny

      I'm not sure why you would consider putting hardened oyster snot in your mouth wierd.

      --
      You are so boring that when I see you my feet go to sleep.
    6. Re:Indistinguishable? by Orlando · · Score: 5, Funny

      Apparently the new ones can be designed to have flaws.

      I hear they spoke extensively to Microsoft to find the best way to consistently achieve flaws.

      --
      -= This is a self-referential sig =-
    7. Re:Indistinguishable? by nospam007 · · Score: 2, Funny

      >Yup. They're calcium carbonate, same material as the oyster shell is made of, and will dissolve in acid.

      For an expensive drink, Cleopatra is supposed to have drunk pearls disolved in wine.
      That must have been some particularly rough wine...
      ---
      It was her osteoporosis medication.

    8. Re:Indistinguishable? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Funny

      Same reason chicks want a chunk of fossilized dinosaur poop on their fourth finger I guess...

    9. Re:Indistinguishable? by Ash+Vince · · Score: 4, Informative

      Since I have read this far down and nobody has posted a decent explanation on the difference between a Debeers mined diamond and a made one I thought I would post some five year old info about where they used to be up to. The most advanced people at making artificial diamonds was a lab in Russia.

      As far as I can remember the main problem they were encountering was Nitrogen. In a natural diamond which forms over a long period of time the nitrogen atoms would drift together over time and end up clumped together and form a seperate molecule (N4) of pure nitrogen embeded in the carbon lattice. This nitrogen molecule absorbed some light from the carbon but was otherwise undetectable.

      In the early attempts at making artificial diamonds they left the nitrogen in but it did not migrate together so ended up actually part of the carbon lattice. This gave the artificial diamonds a slight yellow tint as the nitrogen also emitted light back into the diamond crystal lattice. The Russian solution was to remove all the nitrogen at the start of the process.

      This produced perfect, pure carbon diamonds with a perfect crystal lattice. These diamonds however had a the property of trapping light so that when the light falling on them ceased (you switched the light off) they fluoresced, giving off the light they had been trapping with in the crystal lattice due to total internal reflection. Now this may have made them really cool but it did make them different to naturally occuring diamond.

      What the Russian team really needed was a way to leave in the Nitrogen impurity but so that it did not ever interupt the carbon crystal lattice.

      At this point De Beers was already shitting themselves and started looking at ways of marking there diamonds to prove they were mined diamonds not some knocked up in a lab. They semed to have a number of ideas such as laser etching the DeBeers trademark on each stone and similar but I dont know what the ultimately chose.

      If someone has some more info, please post it but don't start it with your dad, grandad, etc used to be jeweler as this just makes it hopelessly outdated. These new lab made diamonds are not like anything De Beers have had to deal with before (Cubic Zirconia, etc) as they are actually made of carbon which is formed into a diamond lattice using super high pressures but in a lab rather than underground.

      This information came from some sort of TV documentary I saw a number of years ago.

      I did however just throw some stuff at google and this is what came back -

      http://www.bbc.co.uk/science/horizon/2004/diamondl abstrans.shtml - The program I watched on BBC and have summarised (badly) above.

      (Please note - my summary is from memory so the info on the above link will be better.)

      http://www.russianbrilliants.net/introduction.html
      http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/1999/08/99081 7092046.htm
      http://www.wired.com/wired/archive/11.09/diamond.h tml

      --
      I dont read /. to RTFA, I read /. to offend people in ignorance.
  14. Re:Natural Complexity by Jane+Q.+Public · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Others have made these points but they have not put them together into a logical whole:

    People pay a premium -- a VERY big premium -- for "flawless" diamonds. The fewer flaws, the higher the premium. So much so that there are at least three separate quality categories that are commonly called "flawless". As you can imagine, the top category is expensive indeed.

    Given this truth, there is no such thing as je ne sais quoi when it comes to diamonds. Flaws are flaws, and they are undesirable. That is how the entire market is based!

    Therefore, a near-perfect lab diamond is "worth" much more than almost any other natural stone, according to the EXISTING diamond market.

    You can't have it both ways.

  15. "conflict-free" by Duncan3 · · Score: 2, Insightful

    I love how DeBeers turned "diamonds we got by killing Africans and anyone else in our way, funding local wars, and ripping you off on something that is so common everyone could have 10 and we'd still have warehouses full" into ... "conflict-free".

    Until these guys ramp up to massive capacity, buying a diamond still involves killing people.

    --
    - Adam L. Beberg - The Cosm Project - http://www.mithral.com/
    1. Re:"conflict-free" by the_humeister · · Score: 2, Interesting

      I was able to show my fiance the light concerning the evils of mined diamonds and DeBeers. So I got her a Gemesis diamond instead. It's a nice 1 carat canary yellow-orange diamond. So now she's a walking poster child for those who despise DeBeers, especially when other women look at her ring finger and wonder how her fiance was able to afford a yellow diamond because "aren't they really really expensive???"

  16. Consulted with my wife about this by Beryllium+Sphere(tm) · · Score: 4, Interesting

    She did not need persuasion or even a second to think about it. She's adamant (pardon the pun) that any future diamond we own will be a symbol of the highest human skill and ingenuity and will not be something a slave dug up in an armed camp. For the symbolism, for the historical connections, for the emotional resonance, we both prefer diamonds that humans created.

    1. Re:Consulted with my wife about this by shitdrummer · · Score: 4, Interesting

      My wife wanted a diamond ring as an engagement ring. I asked how she would feel wearing a ring that a child may have died for. I explained how man made diamonds last longer and are flawless. I showed her the price difference. She got a 1crt man made diamond solitaire for under AU$1000. I could not have afforded a natural 1crt diamond, and honestly, I would have hated myself for buying it.

      Every person who sees the ring loves it. It's amazing to see the looks on the faces of other women when they see it. You can feel the jealousy and see it in their faces. Brilliant.

      I've just recently bought my wife a 2nd hand natural diamond ring for about AU$150. I would definately recommend man-made or 2nd hand natural diamonds. I figure the damage has already been done by the original purchaser of real natural diamonds, so buying 2nd hand isn't really a moral issue for me, or my wife.

      Women, well at least my wife, don't necessarily want natural diamonds. They want to feel special and see the look of jealousy on the faces of other women. Having said that, there are always the snooty girls who won't wear anything other than a natural diamond. The're usually the ones who will leave you because their new man has a bigger house, better car, and bigger bank ballance than you.

      Shitdrummer.

    2. Re:Consulted with my wife about this by mrchaotica · · Score: 2, Interesting
      She got a 1crt man made diamond solitaire for under AU$1000. I could not have afforded a natural 1crt diamond, and honestly, I would have hated myself for buying it.

      What manufacturer did that diamond come from? I've been looking, but so far all the (colorless, more than equivalent mined ones. I wouldn't mind paying more for man-made, but so far they've been out of my price range.

      Not to mention that every jeweler I try to ask keeps insisting that I mean "moissonite" which is silicon carbide, not diamond. They're all DeBeers' bitches, I tell you!

      --

      "[Regarding the 'cloud,'] ownership was what made America different than Russia." -- Woz

    3. Re:Consulted with my wife about this by shitdrummer · · Score: 2, Informative

      http://www.gemolite.com.au/

      I don't know the details of how they're made or any other technical details. All I know is my wife loves her ring and no-one can tell the difference with a naked eye. Even jewlers comment on how lovely it is when she window shops.

      Occasionally someone will ask if it's real, to which she responds "of course it's real. It's certainly not imaginary.". People tend not to ask any more questions after that. :)

      Shitdrummer.

    4. Re:Consulted with my wife about this by mrchaotica · · Score: 2, Informative

      In my search for a man-made diamond, I've become quite adept at seeing through marketing bullshit (if I do say so myself). Keeping that in mind, I carefully looked through Gemolite's website.

      I hate to break it to you, but based on the description, Gemolite isn't not diamond at all, synthetic or otherwise. Here are the key quotes:

      What is the difference then? Simply this... a diamond, which is the hardest substance in the world, is harder than a Gemolite.

      All diamonds are equally hard; therefore, a Gemolite can't be a diamond.

      Both stones look alike, both stones have the same basic cubic molecular structure, both stones are cut the same way, both stones are polished the same way, and both are clear white, brilliant and fiery! The differences between them are, for the most part, highly technical in nature that you almost have to be a scientist to understand them.

      Lucky for me, I almost am a scientist, so I do understand them. What we've actually got here is a compound with a cubic structure that is not as hard as diamond. Therefore, I'll guess that what Gemolite really is is cubic zirconium. (I would have also guessed that it could be silicon carbide, but the variety of that used for gemstones has a hexagonal (rather than cubic) structure.)

      --

      "[Regarding the 'cloud,'] ownership was what made America different than Russia." -- Woz

    5. Re:Consulted with my wife about this by shitdrummer · · Score: 3, Insightful

      At the end of the day, if it looks like a diamond, it's good enough. Well, for my wife and I anyway.

      Not to mention the added bonus of no-one having to die for my wife to have it.

      I mentioned your comments to my wife (putting my life on the line mind you) and her response was "So what! It looks like a diamond, people think it's a diamond, and it came from you (me). I wouldn't want anything else.". That's probably one of the reasons I married her. :)

      Shitdrummer.

    6. Re:Consulted with my wife about this by Lord_Dweomer · · Score: 2, Insightful
      Women, well at least my wife, don't necessarily want natural diamonds. They want to feel special and see the look of jealousy on the faces of other women. Having said that, there are always the snooty girls who won't wear anything other than a natural diamond. The're usually the ones who will leave you because their new man has a bigger house, better car, and bigger bank ballance than you.

      I don't mean this as an attack...but don't you think your wife is being a bit hypocritical? She doesn't want you to buy her a real diamond because she knows where they come from...yet she wants other women to THINK you bought her a diamond paid for in children's blood? That seems a bit fucked up to me personally. Now if the other women all gawked and got jealous and then your wife explained her reason for not wanting a real one, that would be one thing. But it seems to me that by reveling in the jealousy of other women and playing in to it, she is perpetuating the desire for natural blood diamonds.

      --
      Buy Steampunk Clothing Online!
  17. The purpose of the diamond ritual... by inviolet · · Score: 5, Funny

    The purpose of the diamond ritual is to require the male (or whoever) to put his money where his mouth is, to prove that he is sincere about the relationship. And what's the old saying? "Money has a truthfulness. If a man speaks of his honor, make him pay in cash."

    The diamond is idea for this purpose because it has almost no resale value. It's a way for the male to make a demonstratively extravagant purchase, one which the female (or whoever) is not able to whip back around for a cash refund.

    Of course, it didn't have to be diamonds. Were it not for the DeBeers' marketing savvy, any arbitrary rare object could've sufficed. If technology had evolved differently, women might now be wearing tiny LCD displays on their fingers which play a video loop of their husbands throwing a bundle of cash into the ocean.

    --
    FATMOUSE + YOU = FATMOUSE
    1. Re:The purpose of the diamond ritual... by humberthumbert · · Score: 5, Funny

      Isn't society fucked up? I wish we would stop
      bringing up children to harbor such retarded notions
      of what love is about.

      Well, I don't know what love is, either. But it's not
      Hollywood, it's not dinners and flowers, and it's not
      about all the bullshit games that people play.

      But thanks to the mass media and the continual
      dumbing down of the populace, I reckon I will
      die alone.

      I know, I know, I'm a real downer at parties.

    2. Re:The purpose of the diamond ritual... by Beryllium+Sphere(tm) · · Score: 4, Informative

      I think it was David Friedman who claimed that the ritual serves an even more specific purpose.

      A lifetime ago, the ideal was that a "good" girl would wait until marriage, but in practice many women with normal libidos compromised on waiting until engagement. This led (duh) to guys proposing in order to get laid and then for some reason changing their mind about actually getting married. Laws were actually passed to protect women against having sex with dishonest people.

      The ring, then, he argues, was a nonrefundable deposit to provide some evidence that the guy would actually go through with the marriage.

    3. Re:The purpose of the diamond ritual... by kendor · · Score: 3, Interesting

      I'm told that the original symbolic object for the wedding ceremony was in fact a coin.

      Instead of a ring, my boss gave his wife $2000 in shares of the inaugural issue of the Fidelity Magellen Fund. 20+ years later, I do think she's a bit happier with this gift.

      Instead of a diamond, I gave my wife a $300 filigreed ring, silver. More beautiful than most any diamond. For me, I got a $120 silver ring. I love it, and I love the idea that if I lose it I can swap it out for something else identically symbolic.

      In just a few years, my wife will be done with her surgical training and I expect she will bring home the bank. We will not buy anything so trivial as diamonds. Maybe a nice car, a new laptop, or a donation for children's literacy.

      Think different. Buying diamonds is taking your place as a tool of clever marketing. Aren't there better things to do with your money? -KF

  18. Artificial scarcity by Gregoyle · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Supporting what the parent poster is saying, diamonds are the only gemstones I know of that are artificially scarce. Thus, in my mind, they are a poor investment.

    They are made scarce by the fact that the overwhelming majority of productive diamond mines are controlled by one company, which jealously guards that scarcity (literally, the "extra" diamonds are guarded in huge warehouses). In my mind diamonds are only a few productive non-DeBeers mines away from being made much less valuable.

    If you really need to get gemstones to invest in, I would recommend rubies or sapphires (I know, they're the same stone). Star sapphires are especially prized. Otherwise stick to precious metals.

    --

    "He's more machine now than man, twisted and evil."

    1. Re:Artificial scarcity by ceoyoyo · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Still, ever tried to sell a diamond?

      Diamonds are some of the most expensive gem stones, but they're not even close to the rarest. They're actually quite common, as gemstones go.

      When you try to sell one you find out what their actual market value is.

    2. Re:Artificial scarcity by thue · · Score: 2, Informative

      If you really need to get gemstones to invest in, I would recommend rubies or sapphires

      Emm, they can be made synthetically, pretty cheaply I think. I would not pay lots of money for something which has so little claim to being scarce. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sapphire

  19. If she insists on a "real" diamond... by humberthumbert · · Score: 5, Insightful

    ...run, not walk, away from your woman.

    Especially if you have explained to her what a scam DeBeers has perpetuated
    upon the world, and it has not changed her mind.

    Sure, you can offer her a non-blood diamond. But you have to ask yourself
    if a person like that is someone you want to spent time with.

    Of course, I carry a cellphone with tantalum capacitors in them. The world's a fucked up place.

  20. Re:Natural Complexity by buswolley · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Yes, the post certainly conveys upper-class, Ivy League snobbery. Furthermore, the author, I would contend, is less a scientist and more a literary scholar of classic schools of thought. That is to say, a culture of scholars who consistently misktake eloquence for sound argument, who consistently believe that truth can be discovered by coupling logic with fuzzy verbal terminologies such as utility, happiness, common good, etc. In a word: Philosophy. Can't solve a damn thing, but they feel better about themselves by having an expanded vocabulary (jargon) in an effort to appear sophisticated.

    --

    A Good Troll is better than a Bad Human.

  21. Re:Natural Complexity by porcupine8 · · Score: 3, Informative
    You should really read the Wired article from a couple of years ago, when this was just starting and the lab diamonds weren't on the retail market yet.

    They had a Belgian diamond expert examine one of them, and he was fooled. The industry had to create new types of testing just so that experts can pick these out. There's no uncanny valley here. They're real diamonds, just mass-produced.

    --
    Warning: Apple/Nintendo fangirl. Likes her electronics cute & cuddly. May be rabid.
  22. Double Extra Irony Points for This One by germansausage · · Score: 5, Interesting

    For many years De Beers has been marketing diamonds and saying that the _very_best_ diamonds are flawless.

    Here is a quote : "_Flawless_ is the very highest grade of gem stone, where no internal inclusions or surface imperfections are visible."

    They are going to have a tough time convincing people that lab made diamonds are "too flawless".

  23. Re:Not cheap by aussie_a · · Score: 2, Funny

    Hey, they invented an alternative to Da Beers diamonds for cheapskates like you ages ago. It's artificially created as well`

  24. Re:ethical diamonds? by aussie_a · · Score: 2, Funny

    Whenever I hear blood diamonds I expect them to actually be red. I'm always dissapointed :(

  25. Re:this is new? by quanminoan · · Score: 3, Interesting
    GE I believe had some experiments with shock synthesis, and still does that if i'm not mistaken. The diamonds that method produces are very small, great for machining tools etc.

    There was a company in Florida that was one of the first to produce large grown diamonds which the Wired article mentions. Their diamonds had nitrogen "contaminants" creating that yellow color. Apollo diamond of Boston produced much more pure diamonds through a deposition process, and these could apply to the computer industry. Boron doped diamond creates a 'p' type semiconductor, but I don't believe there is a well accepted method of producing an 'n' type semiconductor essential for a computer chip (perhaps someone here could enlighten us on this?).

    Purity aside diamonds are a great material. Most of you are aware of the hardness, which is great, but the thermal conductivity is even more astounding. Diamond has a thermal conductivity of about 1000 W/m K while silver has a thermal conductivity of about 406.0 W/m K. I've heard that if a pure isotope carbon is used in depostion the thermal conductivity can be much larger than that. If diamond were to become available to engineers cheaply through these processes entire new opportunities would be opened.

    I've actually heard diamond can conduct heat away in a wave like manner, but I couldn't find a source to validate that...

  26. Not clear which process makes these. by Animats · · Score: 4, Informative

    It's not clear from the Adia diamonds whether these are grown like semiconductor wafers or made in high-pressure presses. Gemesys has a Florida plant making gemstones in high-pressure presses. They finally caved in to deBeers and laser-engraves their stones with some ID information. The FTC caved in to the diamond industry and insists they be called "cultured diamonds". They're distinguishable from natural diamonds by their absorbtion spectrum, and deBeers has a tester for this

    Grown synthetics were still experimental when Wired wrote their article, but that's the more promising process. Those, in theory, can be indistinguishable from natural ones.

    The diamond industry had painted itself into a corner with the concept that the most valuable diamonds are "flawless". You do not want to be in that marketing position when going up against the technology that makes semiconductor wafers. Look for PR about how real diamonds have "natural flaws".

    Tied to this is the "Kimberly Process", the agreement supposedly intended to restrict the flow of conflict diamonds. This requires source documentation to travel along with diamonds as they pass through the distribution chain. Previously, diamonds were generic; nobody cared where they came from. The Kimberly Process has the effect of making it much harder to insert large quantities of synthetic diamonds into the distribution system.

    Incidentally, most industrial diamonds have been synthetic for years. Annual synthetic production is around 600 metric tons, most of it in the form of abrasive grits for cutting wheels and such. When you need to cut a slot in concrete pavement, you use a diamond cutting wheel.

  27. Re:Ambiguity by Hawkxor · · Score: 2, Informative

    the ultraviolet light distinction is no longer true. then it was the lack of defects and traces of other elements. that also is no longer a difference. it would take a good chemist to tell them apart.

  28. diamonds are forever by apunahasapeemapetala · · Score: 5, Interesting
    with all this jibba-jabba about diamonds, etc, there are a couple points that might be made:

    first of all, jewelers don't make a "huge profit margin" on diamonds, in fact they generally make very little, unless you walk in there waving a huge wad of cash. there is a very well known document called the "rap sheet" (aka rappaport sheet) which is published weekly and lists the wholesale prices for various grades and types of diamonds. if you know even a little, you can get a jeweler to give you 5% over rap, which is hardly a huge margin compared to media/software/drug companies.

    secondly, diamonds are definitely an item for which you get what you pay for. can you overpay? absolutely. but a $5000 diamond from a good retailer (like whiteflash or blue nile) is going to be twice as good as a $2500 diamond when it comes to the all-important flashyness factor (amount of light returned through the top of the stone) also, any good retailer will buy your diamond back for what you paid for it originally if you want to trade up (like the gold guy)

    third, I never understood what all the fuss was about diamonds, until I bought my fiancee (now wife) one. I'm a pretty miserly guy in general but I have to say splashing out for a 1ct SI1 with excellent cut and symmetry was an amazingly good decision (for me) in retrospect. she gets complements on it every day (years later), and, sad to say EVERYONE JUDGES OUR RELATIONSHIP BASED ON THE FRICKING ROCK. I can't tell you how many times she's heard "oh he must really love you" -- gak -- sad but true.

    finally, to get a bit of historical perspective, the fall of DeBeers has been predicted for quite some time now.. I recommend Ed Epstein's fantastic article from The Atlantic.. if you don't look at the date you might think it was just published: http://www.theatlantic.com/doc/198202/diamond and for those who want a fantastic and unbiased source for diamond info, I highly recommend http://www.pricescope.com/

    1. Re:diamonds are forever by retro128 · · Score: 3, Insightful

      third, I never understood what all the fuss was about diamonds, until I bought my fiancee (now wife) one. I'm a pretty miserly guy in general but I have to say splashing out for a 1ct SI1 with excellent cut and symmetry was an amazingly good decision (for me) in retrospect. she gets complements on it every day (years later), and, sad to say EVERYONE JUDGES OUR RELATIONSHIP BASED ON THE FRICKING ROCK. I can't tell you how many times she's heard "oh he must really love you" -- gak -- sad but true.

      Why is it important to you that anyone judge your relationship based on the size of a trinket? It's the height of materialism to believe that the love you feel for someone is proportional to the amount of money you're willing to part with on a diamond (or anything else, for that matter) Sad to say, anyone who thinks so is a victim of the DeBeers marketing machine. The very article you cited from The Atlantic is a perfect illustration of this. One of the more pertinent parts of the article:

      Since the Ayer plan to romanticize diamonds required subtly altering the public's picture of the way a man courts -- and wins -- a woman, the advertising agency strongly suggested exploiting the relatively new medium of motion pictures. Movie idols, the paragons of romance for the mass audience, would be given diamonds to use as their symbols of indestructible love.

      --
      -R
    2. Re:diamonds are forever by glesga_kiss · · Score: 4, Insightful
      secondly, diamonds are definitely an item for which you get what you pay for.

      Nonsense, unless you value buying over-priced tokenistic items from highly violent cartels that ruthlessly control the price. People that make fake diamonds need to have armed guards for their sites and bodyguards for their home. This is the "value" of diamonds. DeBeers allegedly has a 400 year supply sitting in warehouses.

      Diamonds are completely and utterly worthless unless you want to drill through hard objects. You might "get what you pay for" with a diamond drill bit but I prefer the GTA interpretation: "Nothing says I love you more than a lump of rock mined by child wage slaves in Angola".

  29. Drop 'em over Namibia... by LeDopore · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Step 1: sell short on diamond stocks.
    Step 2: drop a boatload of artificial diamonds over the *natural* diamond mines in Namibia. Document your "salting" of the diamond mines, but keep it secret.
    Step 3: wait until you're sure the new artificial diamonds are in the system (i.e. sold as natural diamonds).
    Step 4: reveal the documented evidence that there are artificial diamonds being sold as natural ones.
    Step 5: profit!

    This idea was originally proposed by A.M., a friend of mine. Pure genius!

    --
    Expected time to finish is 1 hour and 60 minutes.
  30. Pearls by jenara · · Score: 5, Informative

    You can also tell real pearls from fake ones by rubbing them against your teeth. The real ones feel grainy (like sand) and the fake ones are smooth. I'm a big fan of pearls, and the thought of them dissolving in vinegar makes my skin crawl.

  31. This cannot be by aepervius · · Score: 2, Informative

    If the atomic structure was different and there was fluoerescence then this would imply a different structure than tetrahedrical diamond (here and now some double bond for example, or even different type of atoms in the crystaline structure).

    The funny things is I did indeed fabricate diamond : I was in a french labor during the early 90's which studied such stuff. They looked more like glass or plastic than diamond :), but then again we made them in form of lens, not in form of jewelry diamond , so there was not "facet" to reflect light and make them atractive. The method used (an inefficient one) was to seed some diamond on a silicon waffer (microdiamond) then put that in a plasma of 95% H2 and 5% CH4 (more or less a big microwave oven of 10K-20K power) for 24 hours. Afterward we had a nice 1-1.5 inch (2.5-3 cm) radius lens with a thickness of 1/8 inch (3 mm). They were far away from "perfect" for jewelry usage, but I put it under 10 years to get them to the point where the only way to distinguish them from natural one would be to MARK the natural one which goes out of the mine. Turn out I was wrong, it took 15 years :).

    --
    C. Sagan : A demon haunted world:
    http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/0345409469/
    visit randi.org
    1. Re:This cannot be by DavidTC · · Score: 3, Insightful

      No shit.

      Can we check for the mark and if we find it, not buy the thing?

      It amazes me that people used to complain about fucking Nikes and not about DeBeers. Think what you want about sweatshots, at least Nike wasn't waging a fucking war and killing people, and it's not a gigantic cartel that's been manipulating the market for 100 years.

      An informed boycott would ruin DeBeers, because people wouldn't come back, no matter what they did. But, no, let's go after Nike, the wife-beater, instead of DeBeers, the serial killer.

      --
      If corporations are people, aren't stockholders guilty of slavery?
  32. Ruby ? CHEAP ! by aepervius · · Score: 2, Informative

    You realize that we can fabricate ruby in BIG quantites since way way back ? If I recall correctly the first laser were done with a long bar of ruby (artificially made) during the 60's. Just put the ruby in a light path and make a population inversion. And houpla ! You get a red laser. Heck, even if my memory fail me and ruby was artificially created later, I recall using some big bar of ruby as practice work to fabricate a laser in my physic 101 university year. So Ruby might be rare, but you can fabricate it cheap ass. EVen cheaper than diamond. If you really want something interresting, then hunt for a precious stone which is not yet fabricated in industrial quantities :).

    --
    C. Sagan : A demon haunted world:
    http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/0345409469/
    visit randi.org
  33. Truth in Advertising by MarkRose · · Score: 3, Funny

    DeBeers is getting closer and closer to truth in advertising. At first, it was "Diamonds are forever." Then it became "Diamonds, take her breath away." Next? "Diamonds... that'll shut her up!" ;-)

    --
    Be relentless!
  34. Growing profession by Tablizer · · Score: 2, Funny

    Is there any way to buy stock in DeBeers hitmen? I suspect an upswing in business ;-)

  35. The ultimate Reality Distortion Field by nobodyman · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Couldn't agree with you more. I feel DeBeers is a truly evil organization, yet the sham they've been able to pull is nothing short of a marketing masterstroke.

    Take the "two-months-salary" thing. Convincing the consumer that this is a legitimate scenario is the holy grail of product pricing. Imagine asking a jeweler "hey, how much does that ring cost?", and blindly pulling out your wallet when the jeweler says "well... how much ya got?". Yeah, I'm oversimplifying... but considering prices are so inflated, the consumer is really paying in proportion to his/her income rather than in proportion to the diamond's size.

    Somehow DeBeers got it in people's heads that two-months salary is somehow indicative of the your love and ultimately the strength of the marriage. The irony here is that that financial woes are the leading cause of divorce -- if anything this silly notion is probably setting up young couples to fail.

    1. Re:The ultimate Reality Distortion Field by BoberFett · · Score: 2, Interesting
      The irony here is that that financial woes are the leading cause of divorce -- if anything this silly notion is probably setting up young couples to fail.

      All the better to sell them another expensive rock a few years down the road.
    2. Re:The ultimate Reality Distortion Field by infinite9 · · Score: 4, Insightful

      The irony here is that that financial woes are the leading cause of divorce -- if anything this silly notion is probably setting up young couples to fail.

      +20 insightful.

      Number of years I've been married: 15, and not likely to end any time soon.

      Amount I paid for my wife's ring: $0. :-)

      Starting out in debt for both the ring and the wedding is the worst possible way to start a marriage.

      --
      Disconnect your television. Do your own research. Draw your own conclusions. They're probably lying. Don't be a sheep.
  36. "Inwestment" in a diamond? Phffft.... by archeopterix · · Score: 2, Informative
    All in all, an investment in a diamond mine or even in a diamond ring may be a very bad investment.
    "Investment" in a diamond ring has never been any good and hats off to De Beers for convincing the general public otherwise. Here's a link to an article about it:Have you ever tried to sell a diamond?
  37. Re:Natural Complexity by Al+Dimond · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Well if ya don't want to support the De Beers monopoly and all the harm it causes then don't. "Here, babe, I got you this nice ring, I paid an arm and a leg for it... AND SO DID SOME KID IN AFRICA!... err, marry me?"

    Or would you just let your concerns be bowled over by corporate propaganda telling you that you can buy her love? I don't actually know that much about the behavior of the diamond miners, but I do know that jewlery ads on TV make me sick and I change the channel every time they come on. And comments and links from this article's discussion have certainly taught me something. Grow a pair and stand up against those manipulative fuckers.

  38. Bogus from DeBeers by PopeRatzo · · Score: 4, Insightful

    I only recently bought my wife an artificial diamond. She's a mathematician, and wouldn't dream of spending tens of thousands on a real one, but we recently had our anniversary and she deserved one (she lets me play Eve-Online to my heart's content).

    The artificial diamond wasn't cheap, but it wasn't anywhere near the price of a real one of the same size. It's beautiful and kicks light like crazy. I love to play with my laser pointer and that ring. Her friends all think I'm a stud for buying her the rock. (By the way, I bought the stone loose and had a jeweler set it into a beautiful ring. He was extremely impressed by the stone and gave me a dollar-quote that was a few hundred times what I paid. Of course, didn't put it through lab tests, though).

    Screw DeBeers and the pain they've caused in Africa. I say let those bastards go broke and feel pain on the way.

    --
    You are welcome on my lawn.
    1. Re:Bogus from DeBeers by JesseMcDonald · · Score: 3, Insightful

      careful, sounds like you're hinting at fraud there...

      How so? It is a real diamond ring, after all, even if the diamond was created in a lab. As long as he doesn't try to pass it off as a DeBeers diamond he should be fine.

      I am not a lawyer and this is not legal advice.

      --
      "The state is that great fiction by which everyone tries to live at the expense of everyone else." - Bastiat
    2. Re:Bogus from DeBeers by budgenator · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Many would argue that the only reason a dirt-dug diamond from the DeBeers Corp is more expensive is because DeBeers goes to great lengths to create both artificial demand through marketing and artifical scarcety through the almost complete monopoly control of the diamond business

      --
      Apocalypse Cancelled, Sorry, No Ticket Refunds
    3. Re:Bogus from DeBeers by Phroggy · · Score: 3, Insightful

      This may be a stupid question but did you ever think about buying another one, getting it set into a ring and then see what it would get make ebay?

      Moderators are on crack, this is not a troll.

      I think people need to look at how to market these things. Stop buying into DeBeers' marketing spin - stop thinking of artificially-created diamonds as cheap knock-offs of the real thing. Artificially-created diamonds are better than the real thing, not because they're technically flawless, but because they don't support human-rights abuses in Africa. Anyone who's socially conscious ought to be able to see this as a positive thing. A quick Google search turned up this list; for this purpose ignore the first three items.

      Somebody needs to start marketing artificially-created diamonds as being the socially-conscious alternative to the existing cartels. Anyone who already supports fighting HIV in Africa (for example), or opposes funding child/slave labor, should prefer them.

      So, when you advertise it on eBay in that way, no, you're not being fraudulent at all.

      --
      $x='S24;r)>63/* h@<5+oZ)32"5cz';$me='phroggy'x$];
      $x=~y+ -xz+\0-Tx+;print$_^chop$me for split'',$x;
  39. Fictional possibility: company is a DeBeers front by johnjay · · Score: 2, Interesting

    What if DeBeers started a company that claimed to sell man-made diamonds, but actually just sold DeBeers excess stock?

    Facts that might support this plan:
    - New diamond manufacturing processes create flaws and imperfection, making new-style manufactured diamonds indistinguishable from found diamonds. This also makes found diamonds indistinguishable from manufactured diamonds.
    - According to conventional wisdom, DeBeers has a huge stockpile of diamonds. This helps keep the price up by imposing scarcity, but it is also excess, inventory--non-revenue-producing inventory.
    - As manufacturing processes become widespread, it seems very likely that the diamond market could collapse, making DeBeer's excess, non-revenue-producing inventory not worth very much.
    - DeBeers has a proud history of destroying competition by using its monopoly to offer the same product for less.
    - A quick comparison of pricess at http://www.adiadiamonds.com/ and http://www.canadadiamonds.com/ shows similar pricing. For the moment, at least, the market will support high prices for manufactured diamonds.
    - This strategy doesn't make sense in the long-term, but if there IS no long term, then selling off excess inventory through another market is a good idea.
    - As many commenters have noted, there is a lot of perceived value in not having a "Blood Diamond". If DeBeers can convince these commenters that its diamonds are not blood diamonds, then it can sell to them. One way to do this is to pretend that the diamond is man-made, even though it is not.

    The weak link in this chain is the diamond's flaws. If you buy a flawless diamond, it must be man-made.

    I don't really know if this is true--it seems pretty far-fetched, but I don't really know anything about Adia (or any of the other diamond manufacturing companies) either. It's an interesting bit of scepticism, that's all.

  40. Re:anything is a good... monopoly laws? by Megane · · Score: 2, Interesting

    They don't do any business at all in the US. They require diamond buyers to fly to London to get their shipments, then these buyers may resell elsewhere in the US. In fact, if the DeBeers people ever set foot in the US, it is my understanding that they are immediately subject to arrest.

    --
    #naabhaprzrag, #sverubfr-000, #agi-fcbafberq, negvpyr[pynff*=' negvpyr-ary-'] { qvfcynl: abar !vzcbegnag; }
  41. This isn't news by Thaelon · · Score: 2, Informative

    It's not a good article and it's not something that just happened.

    See this for a good article (and it's from 2003).

    You can even buy them here or here, or just read the wired article and check up on the companies mentioned in it.

    --

    Question everything

  42. DeBeers invented the modern marriage proposal by spun · · Score: 3, Insightful

    The whole thing is a DeBeers invention. Before DeBeers, no one would even think that surprising a woman with a big sparkly rock that cost two whole months salary was a good way to get her to say yes. Their market research showed that most women would rather have the man save the money for a downpayment on a house. So they came up with the whole "Surprise her with a diamond" idea. Don't tell her ahead of time or ask her father or any traditional shit like that so that she has a chance of talking you out of doing something stupid, surprise her!

    --
    - None can love freedom heartily, but good men; the rest love not freedom, but license. -- John Milton
  43. talk about a monopoply! by p51d007 · · Score: 2, Informative

    Everyone bellyaches about Microsoft, the oil companies having a monopoly. Geez! The diamond cartel has had a lock on the diamond market for longer than MS or the oil companies. It's about time someone came up with a good alternative to them. I'm sure if this catches on, Debeers will be dumping diamonds on the market to drop the price to cheaper than what the man made ones cost to produce to run them out of business. It's been known for YEARS that Debeers has been hording diamonds to keep the price up. With a vast stockpile of diamonds, they can afford to dump them on the market to undercut the price of man made diamonds. I'm sure with the advance in technology though, hopefully the man made diamond price will continue to drop, just like electronics. When first released, look what a LCD screen cost. Now look at the price....

  44. Diamond Semiconductors by Zorandler · · Score: 2, Informative
    I recall reading several articles about how important the creation of these synthetic diamonds are going to be in the future,
    not as jewelry but as conductive material for the next round of semiconductors...and therefore powering future generations of high
    speed processors and electronics. The properties of diamonds lend themselves better in many respects than silicon in dealing with
    high temperatures and harsh environments. Fascinating! Here are a couple links:

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Synthetic_diamond#App lications and

    http://www.geek.com/news/geeknews/2003Aug/gee20030 827021485.htm

  45. Cash as aphrodisiac by douglips · · Score: 3, Funny

    Apparently $100 bills have aphrodisiac properties. Can anybody confirm or deny this, since although I've seen bathtubs full of $100 bills do the business, it could be explained as placebo.