| WIKI | FAQ | Tech FAQ | |
 http://csua.com/feed/ | |
| ||||||
| 2002/2/14-15 [Computer/SW/Languages/Perl] UID:23864 Activity:high |
2/13 How I catch the user hitting control-c or control-d in perl?
\_ Surveillance cameras.
\_ system(qw(/path/to/stty raw)); --dbushong |
| 2002/2/14-15 [Uncategorized/Multicategory] UID:23865 Activity:very high |
2/14 Saw an ad for an emachines PC. Intel celeron 1.2 GHz, 17" monitor
(16" viewable, .27 dot pitch), 256 MB SDRAM, 40 GB drive, Direct AGP
3D graphics, 16x max CD-RW, Lexmark color printer, and stereo speakers.
$500 after rebate. Good deal? -- soda gal
\_ Depends what you plan to do with it. If you plan to browse the
web, play mp3s, and read word documents, it should do just fine.
If you want to play games, you may be in trouble (Direct AGP 3D
graphics could mean POS previous generation ATI OEM video card).
Also bear in mind that the hardware will almost certainly be low
end, generic hardware. Read: if you want to run a non-MS OS,
you're probably in trouble. Another issue is that, in general,
cheap generic hardware has a higher failure rate. Fortunately,
most hardware fails in the first 30-90 days so it's usually covered
under warranty. At best the speakers will be suitable for casual
listening, at worst they will be junk. Same can be said for the
monitor. It's probably not the kind of monitor you can sit in
front of for 6-8 hours at a stretch, but it'll probably do for
typical non-geek use. So, yes, $500 is cheap for a complete
computer (including monitor), but don't expect any miracles.
-dans
\_ A summary of dans's statement: you get what you pay for.
\_ But don't spend $60,000 on a high end Mercedes Benz, when a $200
mountain bike will server your needs. -dans
\_ isn't the original something like "don't spend 10 yuan on
a silver chopstick when a wooden one would do"?
\_ But a wooden chopstick can't detect posion.
\_ But a wooden chopstick can't detect poison.
\_ $60k won't buy a high end MB. Just FYI.
\_ except you will survive an auto accident w/ a benz
\_ go away, troll
\_ Do you need the monitor? --dim |
| 2002/2/14-15 [Uncategorized] UID:23866 Activity:high |
2/14 Happy V-day!
\_ FOAD.
\_ Bah humbug
\_ I'm suprised more people haven't said anything.
Apathy?
\_ too busy getting some or being in denial |
| 2002/2/14 [Recreation/Dating] UID:23867 Activity:nil 52%like:23863 |
2/13 Can this be real?
http://personals.yahoo.com/display/personals?ct_hft=preview&detailnp=1&cids=x&cids=personals-1013286029-208203&position1.x=1
That's too hot of a chick to need to post a personal ad.
\_ If you really think so, why don't you send a response? The worst case
scenario is she'll ignore you.
\_ [url shortened by query url shortening god]
\_ Eh. She's alright. But that's one f'ing long URL.
\_ 1) she isn't that hot, you need to get out more.
2) she has two kids.
3) I pasted that insane fucking url for that?
\_ Age 26 with two kids and only High School grad and Drinks lots.
\_ Yeah but I'll bet she dances better than you.
\_ Nah: my harem usually forms a circle around me.
\_ Let me guess... you are a 21 year old who has never been laid.
Am I right?
\_ Quit describing yerself in lame attempts to insult me.
\_ plusses: big tits, blonde, stupid, doesn't smoke, wants monkey
minuses: sagging without steel reinforced bra, chunky, blonde,
stupid, drinks a lot, has kids, divorced at 26
I'm not seeing anything real special here. It's very real.
\_ Chunky? Dude, go date Kate Moss.
\_ Dude, seriously, look again at the larger pic. Chunky.
Hour glass, good. Chunky, bad.
\_ she is very beatiful. age 26, she still looks younger.
lover that body, don't know if her tits are fake though
\_ Sagging without wired bra? It wasn't even a regular bra she was
wearing, and the tits still look hot in it.
\_ I can see her two kids and they look fake to me.
\_ Aaaaaah! Fremont! Aaaaaaah! |
| 2002/2/14-15 [Computer/SW/Apps] UID:23868 Activity:very high |
2/14 It was actually really funny this morning in one of my lectures
the prof totally bagged on Ms_word as being the product from the
devil in how it deals with images. if you have ever used it you
know exactly what I mean
He then proceeded to say USE TEX- for a 50yr old guy saying that
I was fairly impressed- he them proceeded to say that unlike
MS-word and others TEX will still be exactly the same 50yrs from
now, and that it has been the same for the last 20yrs it was the
standard back then is the standard now and will be the standard
forever. - kinney
\- dont you think it is more likely for a 50yrs old to be using TeX
than a 20yrs old. Well, some TeX stuff does change like NFSS. --psb
["ok tnx" omitted due to smace considerations]
\_ Doesn't this belong on /csua/tmp/motd.kinney?
\_ well, it's actually short and concise this time...
\_ dunno. is TeX the standard anymoe when more and more things
are going to pdf?
\_ You can't author in pdf. You author in TeX and rip to dvi
then ps then pdf. It looks great. Many academic papers/
dissertations are done this way.
\_ Uhm. See also: pdftex/pdflatex. No PS involved, and the DVI
is PDF-tailored internally.
\_ Why can't you author in PDF with Acrobat?
\_ Acrobat isn't an authoring application. It's for
putting together docs of all different kinds into
a single format. Adobe would have you author in
FrameMaker or PageMaker, Microsoft in Word, etc.,
but Acrobat isn't the app that does the authoring.
\_ not to mention, try laying out an equation in
anything but the TeX family -- no way!
\_ How about the Equation Editor in M$ Office? POS?
\_ It's crap. Not even worth mentioning.
TeX can be gnarly, but its equations writing
capabilities are delectable.
\_ when I was in Cal, it seemed most profs went from powerpoint to
pdf and only added ps as an afterthought. These profs were from the
28 -> 40 age range
\_ TeX! TeX! TeX is the STANDARD! -- not the ED guy |