doctorow at July 9th, 2014 23:00 — #1
stephen_schenck at July 9th, 2014 23:59 — #2
bolamig at July 10th, 2014 00:08 — #3
Typo: should be 120V/3W not 120W/3V.
glitch at July 10th, 2014 00:15 — #4
Methinks sometimes, skeuomorphology goes a bit too far.
lemoutan at July 10th, 2014 00:16 — #5
Steampunked? Is the usage past participle or adjective? The difference in meaning is somewhat significant.
boundegar at July 10th, 2014 00:17 — #6
Particularly because I see neither steam nor punks.
glitch at July 10th, 2014 00:21 — #7
Given the context of following the adjective "Edisonian", it would suggest that this is also an adjective, one born from a verb, which itself was born from an adjective.
To "steampunk" something would be to change it in a way that makes it "steampunk". The past participle form of "steampunked" would mean "to have made steampunk", but the same word could easily be used adjectivally to mean "to have been made steampunk". The difference is essentially just between the active and the passive voice.
Given the context of an LED set into an incandescent bulb housing, the voice in use is the passive, with the LEDs having been the obbject of the steampunking, not the subject which steampunked.
lemoutan at July 10th, 2014 00:27 — #8
So, you're quite sure we're not being punked by this article? Albeit steamily?
glitch at July 10th, 2014 00:54 — #9
Well, I suppose that depends on how you use "steampunk" these days.
I personally am annoyed that people use it to refer to anything at all, no matter how little it has to do with the classical Victorian and Edwardian styles and materials, so long as it's vaguely retro-tech, but many members of the "Steampunk" community don't care to make the sorts of distinctions I do, and since I'm not part of the community, I suppose my opinion counts less.
It's kind of like the difference between Cyberpunk and Post-Cyberpunk. I'd argue the current mainstream trends ought to be called "Post-Steampunk" or something similar, distinct from the original values of classic Steampunkery, but in the end it's entirely not important enough to get worked up over to any real degree.
lemoutan at July 10th, 2014 04:49 — #10
So that'd be a 'no' then.
glitch at July 10th, 2014 05:01 — #11
I'm reasonably sure we're not being punked by this article.
The manufacturors of the product in question, however? Yeah, no, I personally think they're out to take advantage of any suckers they can find, but then that's just my own biased opinion.
doctorow at July 14th, 2014 23:00 — #12
This topic was automatically closed after 5 days. New replies are no longer allowed.