> Obviously, though, tech has not killed the jewelry industry.

I don't know if thats accurate. Supposedly, tech hasn't killed vehicles ownership either for Millenials, but it sure looks like it's helping dig the grave:

http://www.fastcoexist.com/3027876/millennials-dont-care-abo...

"Because millennials use technology in every facet of their lives—from mobile phones to tablets and laptops—to connect with friends and family and to get work done, the tech gadget is their most prized possession, and has a much higher value to a CMC than transportation or owning a car. Think about it: while CMCs are likely to share a car and a ride, there’s no way they would ever share their phone.

CMCs game together and hang out virtually, they don't have that same need to physically get together as prior generations. The CMC’s popularity and relationships are defined by their online status, not their "cool ride" and they make all of their connections online. millennials search for jobs online. They prefer to coordinate dating online, and meet people through websites and apps."

Eh, I meant the "obviously... has not killed" as more of a "If it's dead, why are there so many freaking Kay Jewelers commercials on TV?"

In all honesty, tech probably is "digging the grace", so to speak. The blurb I mention from the article goes on to illustrate how an expensive vacation, shared via photo streams and status updates on social media, is probably displacing the "Check out this jewelry I got! U jelly?"-type of conspicuous consumption people used to partake in.

> In all honesty, tech probably is "digging the grace", so to speak. The blurb I mention from the article goes on to illustrate how an expensive vacation, shared via photo streams and status updates on social media, is probably displacing the "Check out this jewelry I got! U jelly?"-type of conspicuous consumption people used to partake in.

I noticed that you called that out in another comment. Fully agree. Status is never going to disappear, just change forms. Kudos!

I thought that in times before banks were trustworthy stores of wealth, people used jewelry (there were other items as well) as one way to hold and carry their wealth and converted it as necessary. That use I think died out pretty much by the 20th century. Now people use banks to store their money assets, so jewelry was more a vestige of those times, in some respects.

High-end jewellery still serves that function for many who don't trust the banks, want to diversify from currency for some longer term store of wealth, or want to discreetly move some wealth across borders.

On the other this might become a thing again, since Banks start to handle negative interest rates. http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2015-01-24/get-ready-negative-...

> That is, we all gotta wear clothes, nobody's gotta wear jewelry.

Well, strictly speaking, we don't usually have to wear clothes. In the modern urbanized lifestyle, clothing serves almost no important function during warm weather. The main reasons I wear clothing during warm weather are social and legal pressure, not pragmatism.

Well there are also aspects of sanitation and safety (a layer of protection between you and environment) and also protection from overexposure to UV. So it's not only social mores.

I don't buy that at all. The parts of our bodies we traditionally cover with clothing aren't actually any more bacteria-ridden than the rest of us, and we already pick up and spread a ton of infectious agents through our hands. I doubt, for example, that sitting down naked on an NY subway chair is any worse than grabbing an NY subway pole without a glove on.

Considerably better even, since you are unlikely to touch your face with your bum.

The range of weather that allows human to function properly and comfortably without clothes is extremely limited (I'd guess something like 17 to 25 Celsius, cloudy and no rain or wind). I live in Southern California, arguably one of the tamest weather there is in the US, and I can imagine only ~1-2months of the year that I'd try to go naked outdoor. And there are easily a few billions of people living in tropical country that has weather alternating between 30+ Celsius and raining. So strictly speaking, we usually have to wear clothes.

Although if you s/clothes/suits, then the argument would probably be true ;).

You underestimate the limits of the human body. A lot.

A cold-adjusted human can easily deal with 10C without protective clothing (at least for short periods), and human heat-resistance actually improves without body-covering clothing. (Clothes impede the effectiveness of sweating.) Any hot environment humans can handle without AC, they can also handle without clothing.

Just look at any of the african tribes that either wear an insubstantial skirt of some kind or wear nothing at all.

> The main reasons I wear clothing during warm weather are social and legal pressure,

So what you're saying is... you gotta wear clothes?

No, what he's saying is "we don't have to" ("strictly speaking").

Not that I agree, but it's not like he said the same thing in another way. He tried to make a distinction between having as ("we must") vs ("society makes us").

Apologies -- I was being glib. I had originally considered adding a parenthetical "well of course you don't actually have to wear clothes, but you know, we live in a society, etc." to my comment, just to head off such a "well, actually" response. But I figured that surely no one would bother picking that particular nit.

So imagine my delight when, of course, someone did.

You're gonna site naked on a shared chair after dropping a BM? That's disgusting.

>In the modern urbanized lifestyle, clothing serves almost no important function during warm weather

If you only count "saves us from low temperatures" as important and not "enabling me not to see most people's genitals unless we're in a romantic relationship".

Why would I want to see, say, anybody's testicles or someone's half-wiped ass while I work? Even tits, which I'd normally like would be more of a distraction (and no, it's not due to not being de-sensitized to them: you can never be de-sensitized to tits).

How does this relate to various tribes native to hotter parts of the planet, that like to walk bare-ass all the time? How much of is it biological, and how much is it cultural?

>How does this relate to various tribes native to hotter parts of the planet, that like to walk bare-ass all the time? How much of is it biological, and how much is it cultural?

There's an underlying premise here that "cultural doesn't really matter" or that we should just do what's a biological necessity.

As humans, we do most things because of cultural reasons, or in other words, because we collectively came up with some rules/trends/fashions/etc. We're not mice or ants to just do stuff because of biological imperatives.