LivingColors Mini
Apparently one of our favorite designs from the Philips Simplicity concept show we discussed a long time ago has finally been adapted for a commercial product. The Philips LivingColour mini lamp doesn’t look as good as the original concept design but instead takes the form of some kind of odd magical egg. It’s rather expensive too at £85.00 ($164.59 CAD). This really illustrates how something can start off life as a great idea and be bastardized by committee by the time it hits shelves. What a pity.
6 Responses to “LivingColors Mini”
Leave a Reply
Hi, I'm Raj Patel. Nice to meet you. I'm a writer, photographer, film producer, avid reader, gamer, architect, programmer, artist, community manager, and general nerd.
Here at Ohmpage I try to cover the news and trends at the intersection between technology and culture. In practice this means you get a lot of high-tech, new-media, type of fun stuff (the stuff that interests me) presented to you. I surf hard so you don't have to.
If you would like to contact me, please feel free to email me or follow me on twitter. I'm always happy to talk.
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 3.0 Unported License.
Hear ye! Hear ye!
You sir are charged with the use of the Royal ‘we’. As you are not the Maharaja of Bay, you cannot use the Royal ‘we’. As part of the grammar and spelling accords of grade 1 & 2, ‘we’ must be used in reference to multiple people.
There is an additional charge for not converting the monetary value of said object above.
How do you plea!?
We plea not guilty and we call for a dismissal on grounds that we are using the Editorial We and not, as alleged by the prosecution, the Royal We.
Furthermore we call for a dismissal of the charge of failure to convert monetary values on the grounds that while monetary values are regional, the internet is not. Furthermore relative monetary values are subject to change without notice so for journalistic integrity we simply report on the price denoted in the original source without perversion by conversion.
If it’s reported as it’s writ, you must acquit!
Refering from Merriam Webster Dictionary (the most liberal of dictionaries as you have pointed out on numerous posts)
we
Pronunciation: \ˈwē\
Function: pronoun, plural in construction
Etymology: Middle English, from Old English wē; akin to Old High German wir we, Sanskrit vayam
Date: before 12th century
1 : I and the rest of a group that includes me : you and I : you and I and another or others : I and another or others not including you —used as pronoun of the first person plural — compare i, our, ours, us
2 : 1i —used by sovereigns —used by writers to keep an impersonal character
Merriam Webster does not even recognize an Editorial ‘We’ ! Sure wikipedia recognizes it.. but for all I know, you put in that reference yourself. So unless you’re trying to get Editorial ‘We’ into the Merriam Webster Dictionary, I really have to object.
Umm actually your webpage IS region specific. ohmpage.CA <- The CA stands for CANADA! The £85.00 lacks context and significance beyond England! Give your readers a little credit and assume we all understand that currencies vary depending on when the conversion was done. Its ‘ok’ to take that extra step add the brackets. example: £85.00 ( $164.59 CND ). I’m pretty sure the internets police won’t hunt you down and lock you up.
Ohmpage.ca concedes your point on currency conversion. We will adjust our style correspondingly.
Regarding the Editorial We, Ohmpage does not recognize the publication you cited though we can offer a non wikipedia alternative: http://dictionary.reference.com/search?q=we
“Only kings, presidents, editors, and people with tapeworms have the right to use the editorial “we.”†– Mark Twain
There is the (mistaken?) belief that you are the author of Ohmpage rather than the editor, hence the confusion.
Nosism is a tricksy thing. At best it’s confusing. Sometimes it’s presumptuous (only math nerds like the author’s plural). At worst it’s pretentious. References to outdated monarchs (QEII doesn’t even use ‘we’ anymore) or stuffy academics seem out of place on a blog to many people.
So you may want to stick “Editor” up there on the sidebar with your photo. Unless you are suffering from a tapeworm. In that case, get well soon.
I am the Editor of Ohmpage.ca though, plus I am a math nerd, and also may have a tapeworm.
If/when I have other authors contribute to the site, I edit their work and thus am the editor by virtue of me editing.