I agree with you that there was nothing wrong with the voiceovers of those thoughts in the film. Just because it's seen of as tacky or whatever my many filmmakers doesn't mean it's not effective. Those thoughts are necessary to knowing the characters. And it should be noted that compared with the book, the voiceovers in the film are actually quite minimal - the books spend more time listening to people's inner thoughts than to what they say.

You'll note, however, that I haven't said it was a good adaptation. I wonder if Jorodowsky's adaptation would have been better or worse. The sci-fi channel somehow managed to do both a better and worse job at it.

You're missing out, IMHO books 4-6 are the best ones. My favourite is book 5 (Heretics).

(In case you were wondering, there are only 6 Dune books. It's a pity it ended on a bit of a cliffhanger, but it's probably better than the alternative of somebody screwing it up royally with hack writing and trying to tie it into their own series)

haha, godwins law might indeed need updating. ;)

I totally am not an infidel! May his noodly appendage strike down any who think I am!

You do make a good point and I did see it the first time around, I was mostly kinda sorta just playing devils advocate. I do totally agree with you that celebrating the killing of innocents (or, indeed, anyone) is not something that should happen. For example, my first reaction when I heard that Osama Bin Laden was killed was: "No trial huh?", and I found the images of people celebrating sickening. I'm no fan of the man, but I seem to recall hearing somewhere that everybody has a right to trial and due process. Hell, even the Nazis got trials. And now we're firmly in godwin's territory!

I guess it comes down to the good old "what is truth" question really. IMHO my opinion is right, and I do believe that anyone still working at the NSA should quit their job and go do something less morally questionable (like prostitution or selling drugs). But that's just my (correct) opinion, and I wouldn't advocate killing any of those people, or indeed doing anything to them other than dismantling their employer via due process or trying to convince them to quit their jobs. I didn't take philosophy, so I don't know if there is any "universal morality" which really does apply everywhere. It would seem to me that not killing people over beliefs should be a universally-accepted kind of thing. But then I tend to have high expectations. Maybe we can get a philosophy-type person to chime in?

As I said, you do raise a good point and I commend you for wondering such things, if only there were a couple of billion more like you.

Mostly, though, I just wanted to quote clerks, it seemed appropriate ;)

This sounds like a great way to troll apple:

Call them and make a reservation.
Go to your appointment.
Try it on, ask a bunch of questions, wasting as much time as you can. Bonus points for ridiculous questions that don't give the gambit away.
When it comes to the crunch time and you can't waste any more of their time, you say "No thanks, it's a piece of crap and way too expensive".
Rinse, repeat.

To respond to your soapbox, I refer you to Clerks:

(source)

I'm not trying to say that everyone working for the NSA should be killed, but any NSA employee who hasn't quit their job since Snowden is on morally dubious ground at best, regardless of whether they're part of the elite hacking team, a security guard, a janitor, or a roofer.

How much do Microsoft pay you for each post on here?

Then I guess you should tell all the netbook makers that they're wasting their time. And you should call google and tell them not to bother with chrome OS. Likewise firefox OS.

see my replies elsewhere, you've said nothing new or interesting here.

Actually, as I've pointed out elsewhere, the original question was "why would anybody game on Linux?". And I've already addressed that elsewhere.

Bullshit, you clearly have no idea what you're talking about. The advent of native Linux games will cause a reduction in the number of windows installs out there, which will change the figures. I know more than one person who has deleted the windows partition they used to use solely for gaming since the advent of steam for Linux. These people will not be buying any more windows licenses.

But I guess you're right, the '2%" figure probably won't change, because when these people buy machines without windows installed next time they upgrade it won't show up as a "purchased machine" on Microsoft's balance sheet, so the number they release and which you swallow and regurgitate will be exactly the same.

I'm not sure what any of this has to do with gaming, or why I want to play games on Linux

Bullshit.

Wow, you're not paying attention at all. See my reply above.

Wow, talk about shifting the goalposts. This started as a discussion of who would game on Linux, and why would they do so. I gave you a bunch of reasons, and rather than respond to them you decided to turn it into a "Linux on the desktop" debate, and what is best for "normal users" and "average people".

I'm not talking about average people, because I couldn't care less what they do on their computers, what operating system they run, or what software they use or what games they play. They can do whatever they want on their computers - they're their computers. The only reason I would like to see more Linux adoption is so that I see more native Linux software.

And there's not even very much software I want: a good, easy video editor, and FL studio (or a replacement for it) are the only 2 that spring to mind that aren't games. Games are the big one. And I'm prefectly happy to not play a game because there's no linux port - there is no game that I'm so interested in to make it worth the hassle of installing, much less using, windows.

One of the reasons there's not very much non-game nonfree software for linux is that they have a hard time competing with the huge library of free stuff which is available - why would I buy sound forge when I can just use audacity? There are only a few niches where there's any chance for a nonfree option to get a foothold. And in many of those cases (e.g your tax software), any linux user can just run it in a VM or using wine, which incidentally is a better desktop experience than using a native windows install, for reasons I've already related and you've already chosen to ignore.

I'm not here to debate what "average people" want or care about, or when the year of the linux desktop is coming, because I really truly don't care one whit. I don't care if you and 99.99999% of the ignorant masses like your terrible interfaces (which you've already admitted you don't, but you're apparently happy to be spoon-fed crap and praise the people who feed it to you). For me, the year of the linux desktop was 2001.

Thanks.

I was going to say "This was submitted by startswithabang, which means it's a link to medium.com, perhaps the most terribly designed site on the net - I'm not clicking it - does anyone have the real link?", but you saved me the trouble.

The original, full-res image is available for download here.

Wait, what? I thought windows did everything better?!?

Fixed.

So your solution to hating windows 8 was to wait until MS fixed it for you. Me? I would have expected to be able to fix it myself, and I would have uninstalled it when that wasn't possible.

Couldn't agree more.