How many jets failed before the US military perfected the jet engine?
Okay, I'll bite - can you expand on this? A citation?
Oblig Ref. Warning Flash Ahead!
Garmin has a unit called the Astro for tracking hunting dogs. It isn't cheap, suggested retail price is $600.
I dislike that kind of thought experiment because it explicitly dissuades you from even trying to find a way to get both, or in general thinking critically..
The original way you phrased it, it is implicit that the people who are trying to interview you are going to be not only inflexible to absolutely inflexible. If the thirty seconds it would take you to apologize, scribble a telephone number, and run off, would completely ruin the interview, then the person on the other side is a completely OCD asshole. Alternately, if the woman was in such a position that you would never ever ever ever ever meet her again if you turned her down now, or if she could skin you alive if you came back after running off--even with a good excuse--then it probably wouldn't work, and if you could make it work, is it really worth it?
The "two doors" method is pretty much the same. Rarely does one actually find a situation where things really are that clear cut, and if you do, it's probably something you wouldn't want anyway; if someone "put the job of my dreams" and "put the woman of my dreams" behind doors, then I would know they were gaming me and I wouldn't trust either of their choices; I'd simply walk away. And again, as the GP said, if the "woman of my dreams" was someone I already knew but who was not going to accept that I needed a job, screw her. And if it's someone I didn't know, why should I trust someone who's trying to make me decide?
I'm not saying that things never turn out analogously in real life--they do. But if running into a situation like that causes your brain to shut down and makes you only see two mutually exclusive options, then you pretty much already lost.
Well, the definition of pipes varies a bit on different OS's (even among Unix systems), but certainly on Windows you can use named pipes that are message-oriented and won't scramble up messages from multiple clients.
Unix FIFOs (which can be considered a specialized pipe) also support atomic writes if the message isn't longer than the pipe buffer (PIPE_BUF). Typically a client creates a private FIFO and then sends it's path to the well-known server FIFO. Thus a one-to-many (server to clients) capability is created. See UNIX Network Programming, Interprocess Communications Volume 2, Second Edition by W.Richard Stevens, Chapter 4.
The heavily armed group controls much of the south and parts of the capital Mogadishu, and courts run by its clerics have ordered executions, floggings and amputations in recent months.
It has also banned movies, dancing at wedding ceremonies and playing or watching soccer in the areas under it control.
"We do not tolerate anything that may corrupt the people,"
So now there are thousands of Somali pirates, rolling in money from their ongoing exploits, who have now been told that it is illegal to have fun under threat of flogging, amputation, or death.
It's karmic in its own way.
I was one of the people that had a very bad experience with SORBS.
My company got a new ISP with an external block. I'm sure at some point that block had been used as a dynamic range. I had not set a PTR record (because the IP of the mail server changed at the last second), my PTR and A record for that mail server were not set to 12 hours (seriously, who does that?), and I was banned on the SORBS list. I had an SPF record, you could obviously see that I'm part of a legitimate organization, and it would have taken maybe 2 minutes of work for an physical admin to realize that this was a mistake.
It took two support tickets with SORBS, 5 calls to my ISP, and around 10 days to get off the list. In the meantime, we could not contact certain people using it. And what's worse is that the only solution that the admin of SORBS had was to get everyone to stop using the SORBS list. I think that the TTL requirements are the worst part of their solution.
In my opinion, an unattended, automated black list is worse than the problem of too much spam. You are blocking valid mails, and because you are blocking it at the IP level, the end user doesn't even see it show up in their spam bucket many times. If SORBS had a single admin, checking their email once a day, they could easily filter out some of these issues.
I encouraged several anti-spam vendors to stop using their services for this reason, through the different companies that we interact with. There are several other blacklists that do their job well, there is no need to use an unattended blacklist.