Hacker News Reader

Comment by asdfman123 | Hacker News Reader

> Strebe has coated a $2 million (£1.6 million) 16.78-carat natural yellow diamond in the material

Wouldn't it have been smarter to, say, make a glass replica, coat that, and pocket the $2 million diamond?

It's a piece of art - you could reduce the cost in many ways but it's subjective whether you'd be achieving the same thing as it doesn't have any intrinsic value except for how people appreciate it.

I know. My "joke" is that the artist could have used it as a scheme to steal a diamond. Not necessarily implying any foul play though.

There's an old cartoon depicting a man standing outside of a Jeff Koons art show with a table full of inflatable animals and flowers for sale.

A sign says "your friends will never know the difference!"

Banksy did something similar where he sold art in New York for $60 without indicating they were his work. [1] After this was revealed, some of those works that were sold that day went for six figures at auctions.

[1] https://www.theguardian.com/artanddesign/video/2013/oct/14/b...

That's kind of an opposite, where they bought something they thought was authentic but not famous, but I take your point.

And that, ladies and gentlemen, is how you launder money.

I mean, it could be the case that the real diamond isn't there at all, and is back safely in some vault.

If the artist claims he did coat the actual diamond, it's still a piece of art, just a different one.

Archimedes solved figuring out for density, there are also other non-destructive tests.

Tests only work if someone is actually going to do them :)

Perhaps they did and are lying about the diamond.

In that case it wouldn't be art but just a demonstration.

Or a different kind of art

Reply on news.ycombinator.com