Sorry chaps but I couldn't finish this stupid article. I think this paragraph captures it all;

Yet as Peter Berbergal of the Boston Globe notes, “In all of the new Steampunk design there is a strong nostalgia for a time when technology was mysterious and yet had a real mark of the craftsperson burnished into it.” Never mind the fact that the Victorian era was a time of demystification: Darwin’s theory of natural selection upset centuries of received religious knowledge about human origins, and the mechanization of virtually everything meant you could produce objects, designs and books ten or twenty times faster and distribute them to the very ends of the earth. As Philip Meggs, commenting on the beginning of the Industrial Revolution, has succinctly put it: “Handicraft almost completely vanished. The unity of design and production ended." The world had suddenly become smaller. If Steampunkers are looking to the past for some sort of inspired return to a prior era, then they are running in slack parallel with their ancestors. The Victorians were cultural raiders without peer. Rococo, Tudor, Gothic Revival and the umpteenth generation of Neo-Neo-Classicism were not enough. They went abroad to bring back the ill-gotten gains of their imperial aesthetic loot. Moorish ornaments, Ukiyo-e, Chinese porcelain, hieroglyphics all found their way into Victorian eclecticism. Form before concept.

Yep. Steampunkers are just a bunch of daydreaming slackers who don't understand anything. Does this strike anyone else as just more diatribe from yet another bunch of aging boomers who can't get over themselves? I don't know about the blogger but I am referencing the genius who scripted the above.I can speak to this since I am technically one of them. Born in '63 I were. Yet these pompous, over flatulent windbags deride, ridicule, and generally disdain anyone who doesn't go along with their personal ideas. If you don't, you are simply to ignorant, crass(please, read between the lines of the above paragraph), and unimaginative to really get it that your forebears were a bunch of running dog Yankee, or Limey if your a Brit :), imperialists who wrecked the world. What a crock. I am more a fan of straight up Victorian/Edwardian fashion, literature, and styles. Classic stuff like the architecture he derides and the mechanicals of the day. And even though it was the dawn of the industrial age, most things were, I assure you, developed with a lot of handiwork involved. I have said this to my kids, my mother, and others. Starting about ten years ago my generation and younger have yearned for a more classical, traditional lifestyle that does not eschew the beauty and practicality of industrial age design. I find this a stark, yet beautiful contrast to the godawful plain brick, chrome, and glass of the 40's - 70's. Yuck. Sorry for such a bitter rant but this sort of stuff just makes me dislike these sorts even more than I already do. If this is too much Jake just nuke it. I am a bit grumpy today.

Here's the response comments that I posted:

My name is Tom Sepe and I'm the creator of the Whirlygig Emoto - (the "steampunk motorbike" that you failed to credit.) http://tomsepe.com/fabrication.html

Firstly, if you are going to make the point that steampunk is non-functional surfactant, then you really shouldn't use a photograph of my bike as an example. The fully-functioning Whirlygig is built on a junked 1967 frame that has been completely re-tooled, gutted and forced to motivate using lead-acid chemical electricity - an 18th century technology that very well could have been society's primary one if not for the oil and rubber industries. (I am of course using modern electronics to control the input and output of electrons, yet the principle is the same one that powered the first electric vehicles.) http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_the_electric_vehicle

In addition, my bike sports a fully functional handbuilt steam-boiler, produciing 100psi steampressure in just about 20 minutes. If you want to feel the superficial quality of my steampunk art, then please place your hand over this valve while I open it.

Now, I admit that the steam doesn't power the vehicle, but steampunk doesn't mean "runs on steam" - it's an aesthetic title.... The use of the word "steam" in steampunk is a poetic reference to an era, meant to be an evocative and imagebased. We are talking about art and artists after all.

And although I agree that "function" is a primary component of Steampunk, I would also submit that it is the job of the artist to decide what function is fulfilled. If what you get is a working computer - great! If it is a 1940's parachute that functions as a dress - amazing! If it is a tiny steamboiler that gurgles and confuses - incredible! So to critique a laptop-mod as being "all about the look" is really missing the point. And to critique the entirety of the Steampunk house because of the paint-job in one room is lacking journalistic depth.

What you fail to notice in your reductionism - is that there is a lot going on within this genre, bridging multiple countries and cultures. Including fashion, design, literature, music, art, architecture, unique modifications, custom fabrications, community, skill-share, events and just plain 'ole people doing something they like.

If at worst, Steampunk is "bad hobbyists with great publicists" as you say, then perhaps you might also notice that at its best, Steampunk is a vibrant and multi-faceted artistic movement, that includes men and women, geeks, metal-workers, hobbysts, scientists etc..- a movement that is inspiring people to create beautiful, functioning objects in the world around them, and to share that know-how with anyone who is curious.

Tom Sepe

This article makes me a little mad. It seems like a big lash out at something he dosen't understand or take any time to actually look into to criticize properly. Calling steampunk in general a hoax because a 'steampunked' laptop dosen't actually use steam and still run on silicon chips is a childish argument and show's a lack of research. Maybe I'm making assumptions here, but it's my understanding that modding look of an object has a goal of just that, changing the appearance. Different people have different tastes, and ours just happen to be brassy. In this case it's purely about ascetics. It's art, and if it's not to you specific liking, then that's your loss. He also seems to neglect all the projects that truly do bring alive Victorian flare without a hint of insincerity, such as restoring and incorporating kerosene lamps, converting RC toys to run off model steam engines, and other total projects like The Brass Lion (a recumbent trike).
This part sums up my understanding of his understanding:
"One could easily argue that following the etched surface of a printed circuit board would provide no less a fascinating visual "map" of the processes of a computer or electronic device."
Clearly missed the point on what about, and why it's interesting. Basically, I think he just dosen't 'get it' and is bullying something he dosen't understand.
I know I'm being argumentative and not giving his points much value, but I don't see any gain from listening to criticism form someone who dosen't get it.

It reminds me of Merlin Mann's Steampunk DIY video blog monologue, but at least that was a little more informed and lets be honest, it was a little funny if taken in a self reflexive manner.