Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Lotus 1-2-3 arbitrary resolution

lock.cmpxchg8b.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

61–70 of 130 posts

Re: Lotus 1-2-3 arbitrary resolution

#61

Post by JNRowe »

sir_nop wrote: post #8
dwiel wrote: post #3

A bit off topic, but what I've wanted forever and never found is a spreadsheet that deals in units natively. So if one cell is in Newtons and I divide it by a cell that is in m/s^2 I want the resulting cell to be in grams. Units should propagate through the sheet automatically. Unit prefixes can either be automatic (km, m, mm, um, etc) or fixed as you would with a format setting. Google calculator is the closest thin…

Or a programming language? Or a Python module?

Beyond simply joining in on the F# love... If you're using Python anyway, then Pint¹ makes unit handling really easy.

¹ https://pint.readthedocs.io/en/stable/tutorial.html

Re: Lotus 1-2-3 arbitrary resolution

#62

Post by pletnes »

sir_nop wrote: post #8
dwiel wrote: post #3

A bit off topic, but what I've wanted forever and never found is a spreadsheet that deals in units natively. So if one cell is in Newtons and I divide it by a cell that is in m/s^2 I want the resulting cell to be in grams. Units should propagate through the sheet automatically. Unit prefixes can either be automatic (km, m, mm, um, etc) or fixed as you would with a format setting. Google calculator is the closest thin…

Or a programming language? Or a Python module?

In python there’s the pint module, which works with pandas dataframes, which can read/write excel sheets. So yeah, maybe. Why do anything in excel, except for data entry?

Re: Lotus 1-2-3 arbitrary resolution

#63

Post by friend-monoid »

scrumper wrote: post #38
leblancfg wrote: post #11

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Never tried it, but Wolfram has a Mathematica plug-in for Excel. https://www.wolfram.com/products/applications/excel_link/

I remember Mathematica being a bit weak with units actually. Natively there's no support, you have to rely on add-on packages and I didn't have much success with the popular one. But my experience is from version 8 (a while ago) so it may have improved since.

Mathematica 9 and above has had significant improvements in its unit support. I’ve found it to be really good.

Re: Lotus 1-2-3 arbitrary resolution

#64

Post by spockz »

bombcar wrote: post #55
tyingq wrote: post #51

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"Can't believe the Lotus FTP site is still live. Wonder where that thing is running" Had me curious as well. $ host ftp.support.lotus.com ftp.support.lotus.com is an alias for service.boulder.ibm.com. service.boulder.ibm.com has address 170.225.15.26 It's running WUFTPD 2.6.3, which is abandonware as far as I can tell. Though no open vulnerabilities listed.

Nobody at IBM will ever want to be the person to suggest decommissioning a server that might make a paying customer yell at their manager. Expect it to continue forever.

This is what metrics are for right? See that nobody is using it, shut it down. Which probably won’t happen anymore with all the HN traffic it receives now.

Re: Lotus 1-2-3 arbitrary resolution

#65

Post by bombcar »

spockz wrote: post #64
bombcar wrote: post #55

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Nobody at IBM will ever want to be the person to suggest decommissioning a server that might make a paying customer yell at their manager. Expect it to continue forever.

This is what metrics are for right? See that nobody is using it, shut it down. Which probably won’t happen anymore with all the HN traffic it receives now.

Metrics are hard to justify and use on a "once every five years" type of access. Much simpler to throw the machine you don't know what it does into a VM and leave it alone.

Re: Lotus 1-2-3 arbitrary resolution

#66

Post by londons_explore »

bawolff wrote: post #56
londons_explore wrote: post #52

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Don't use any site he made... Anything compatible with IE3 is incompatible with modern privacy expectations (doesn't support any vaguely secure variant of HTTPS, and any server which supports old variants can't be protected against downgrade attacks, and therefore cannot protect users privacy)

You can't downgrade a modern browser to ssl 3 (the most recent version supported by IE3) because modern browsers dont support sslv3 (prior to dropping support there were also some fixes for downgrade attacks). Dont get me wrong, supporting sslv3 is still a terrible idea. It would be interesting to know though what the most secure possible setup is for servers supporting ie3, both when a modern browser connects and wh…

Is what you say still true if you also want to support IE4, 5, 6, 7, etc? You'd want functionality for all the browsers, and strong privacy for the latest versions of browsers.

I assume if you're supporting ie3 you also want to support every newer version.

Re: Lotus 1-2-3 arbitrary resolution

#67

Post by duskwuff »

bawolff wrote: post #56
londons_explore wrote: post #52

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Don't use any site he made... Anything compatible with IE3 is incompatible with modern privacy expectations (doesn't support any vaguely secure variant of HTTPS, and any server which supports old variants can't be protected against downgrade attacks, and therefore cannot protect users privacy)

You can't downgrade a modern browser to ssl 3 (the most recent version supported by IE3) because modern browsers dont support sslv3 (prior to dropping support there were also some fixes for downgrade attacks). Dont get me wrong, supporting sslv3 is still a terrible idea. It would be interesting to know though what the most secure possible setup is for servers supporting ie3, both when a modern browser connects and wh…

> I would guess that its at least secure against passive monitoring

It isn't. IE3 used 40-bit encryption by default, which is trivially brute-forceable with modern hardware. Some versions supported 128-bit ciphers, but only through an unusual upgrade process [1] which depended upon "Global Server ID" SSL certificates with special extensions which are no longer issued.

[1]: https://stuff.mit.edu/afs/sipb/machine/anxiety-closet/apache...

Even if it weren't for that, it's no longer possible to issue a certificate that would be recognized by IE3. All newly issued SSL certificates are required to be signed with SHA256, which wasn't even published until 2001. (The final release of IE3 was in 1997.)

Re: Lotus 1-2-3 arbitrary resolution

#68

Post by technofiend »

lykr0n wrote: post #10

Stuff like this is so cool, and also highlights the importance of archiving the internet. I've never used Lotus 1-2-3, but this makes me want to try and get it running to try out older software that is brutally efficient.

Lotus 123's slash commands were extremely handy. To the point where Microsoft was forced to copy them when Excel first came out to ease transition of users. There's a ton of older references on the web on how to use them. See https://www.isric.org/sites/default/files/isric_report_1990_... for a reproduction of 123's main menus. The sequences become muscle memory really fast.

Re: Lotus 1-2-3 arbitrary resolution

#69

Post by moonbug »

dwiel wrote: post #3

A bit off topic, but what I've wanted forever and never found is a spreadsheet that deals in units natively. So if one cell is in Newtons and I divide it by a cell that is in m/s^2 I want the resulting cell to be in grams. Units should propagate through the sheet automatically. Unit prefixes can either be automatic (km, m, mm, um, etc) or fixed as you would with a format setting. Google calculator is the closest thin…

you can do that in mathematica, I think.

Re: Lotus 1-2-3 arbitrary resolution

#70

Post by moonbug »

londons_explore wrote: post #52
jasonjayr wrote: post #30

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is waaaay off topic, but you've piqued my interest -- what on earth are you still testing with IE3 for?

Don't use any site he made... Anything compatible with IE3 is incompatible with modern privacy expectations (doesn't support any vaguely secure variant of HTTPS, and any server which supports old variants can't be protected against downgrade attacks, and therefore cannot protect users privacy)

bro, it's ok not to have Https on all the things.
Post reply on HN