I have yet to see MOM (message oriented middleware) offerings on Linux
If you have Oracle on Linux you can use AQ, and others have mentioned IBM's MQSeries. Also there is a pure Java one called SonicMQ but I've never used it.
Well, in fairness, this could happen even if Mac OS X itself weren't proprietary, as iTunes still could be. For that matter, iCommune still is, too. Hm, none of that makes me feel any better...
So we have a proprietary product on a proprietary OS using a proprietary service.
Why exactly did you post this article? What's it got to do with anything?
I am not racist and really like the fact that India is breeding smart hardworking engineers, but wish they were payed decent salaries for their sake and our own sake.
But they are paid decent salaries. Currency works like anything else, supply and demand. Lots of people want dollars, so dollars go up in value relative to other currencies. Or Euros, Sterling, Swiss Francs, Yen, etc. These are the "hard" currencies, because you can use them to do cross border business (among other reasons). You can't use Rupees for this, so the value of Rupees relative to dollars goes down (because Indians are converting Rupees to hard currencies so they can import stuff).
The effect of this is that in dollar terms, India is very cheap - an Indian on $4/hr doesn't need to work a whole hour to afford a cup of coffee, like an American on the same dollar salary would! The Indians are getting paid in, and spending, their local currency.
Anyone who claims Indians on $4/hr are getting exploited doesn't know what they are talking about and should be dismissed out of hand.
Those thinking of pointy-clicky interfaces being a magic wand should go and try writing bubblesort with mouse.
Why would you want to? No-one in the real world ever writes a sorting algorithm. If you want it sorted, add ORDER BY to your SQL and you're done. 90% of software development is about getting data into and out of databases in different ways, and doing some processing on it along the way. The complexity is not in the code itself, it's in the real-world problem the code is written to solve.
You're right that non-boilerplate code can't be automated, but the amount of work that is non-boilerplate is relatively small, particularly in terms of lines of code. I've written apps that maybe 60% were pure GUI code, just creating widgets and adding them to forms, etc. Maybe 30% more is just the initialization, connect to DB, open files stuff that's the same between most apps, just calls to libraries. That leaves 10% new code. Using RAD and CASE and c'n'p reduces development time to a fraction.
Outfits like this are not fly by night charlies that churn out crap, they are some of the best in the world. We (software professionals) will either step up to the plate and hit a home run and prove our worth or we will get run over like textiles and electronic manufacturing.
Consulting firms (I used to work for one) have a technique called the bait-and-switch. Here's how it works. You send a team packed with your most experienced technologists and best-dressed MBAs to do the pitch. It's never actually written down anywhere, but you try to convince the mark that these are the people that will be working for them. Then once the deal is signed, you send in a bunch of 22-year-olds on their first real project to do the work, in fact to learn how to do the work, on the mark's dime.
That's how it is here. Do you seriously think everyone of Wipro's 15,000 developers is as good as the shuttle team, who are no more than a few dozen, handpicked and rigorously trained? No... the CMM5 types will be wheeled out for pitches and soundbites, then quickly shuttled off to the next prospective client.
Wipro has Level 5 certication in three different categories. It's eye-glazing stuff, but an amazing achievement.
I find it impossible to believe that every one of Wipro's 15,000 developers is capable of writing code to this standard.
Maybe Wipro have 3 teams of a few dozen or so elite programmers who work on very well-defined long term projects, where the software has one specific job to do and everyone on the team has a decade's worth of familiarity with the codebase. But the rank and file are likely to be about as talented as the rank and file at EDS or CSC.
And by doing so, the "rich world" will eventually give away so much work that they will be poor.
Historically, that's a fallacy. How many farmers are there in the US now as a percentage of the population compared to a century ago? Is the country richer or poorer now? Standards of living have gone up over the last 50 years, despite the auto industry moving overseas. Did you know that textiles was once a high-tech industry, and textile manufacturing technology was a jealously guarded secret? Where are all the textile workers now, and is the country richer or poorer since they left?
Multiply that by the number of people who earn a living here in the U.S. by writing code, and where does that leave us?
What about all the people who earned a living cleaning out stables? The country is wealthier now that those people's jobs were obsoleted by the car - and funnily, there weren't hordes of unemployed stablehands, they just went to do something else.
Don't you see that this is 100% different than the 1980s? In the 80s, employers were loyal to employees.
Can you back that up with something other than mere nostalgia?
In general employers are as loyal to employees as employees are to employers. If someone gets a better offer (more money, fewer hours, shorter commute, whatever) they will happily resign and go take up the offer - effectively sacking their employer and getting a new one. That's as it should be, because it forces companies to compete for the best employees. And similarly, there is competition for the best employers, which happens whenever more than one person applies for a job.
This WOULD all blow over if our companies weren't taking advantage of the cheap labor over there. As it stands, it will continue to rack us in the nuts until our salaries match the ones in India.
Or until their salaries match yours, which is far more likely.
Globalization = cheap shirts, fewer jobs, and a fast-paced race to the bottom.
Bad news for shirt makers, good news for shirt wearers.
some stupid errors like saying developers code with UML
These days you can "program" in UML. The actual underlying code is C++ or Java generated by the CASE tool from your UML diagrams, but it's still programming, just at a higher level. For example, instead of programmatically declaring a member variable of a class, you click on the UML class diagram and add a property, instead of typing class Z extends X you drag a line.
You usually have to go to real code to actually implement methods, but using a RAD tool to layout your GUI, a CASE tool to do all the object defintions and database connectivity, only writing code by hand when you have to, is a very productive way to work. Programming Swing or Motif or MFC is very repetitive and can be highly automated, as can writing wrapper code for database tables to present them cleanly to objects.
You'll get a lot of geeks sneering that a text editor is the only way to write code, but that is an obsolete way of working. Computers are built to automate repetitive tasks, and once you've written one form or report by hand to show that you can, doing it again is just a waste of time.
For one, the governments arn't as trusting with the OS as MS would like. That's why you hear stories that government agencies already have many systems or are looking have having many systems running linux which they can freely view and examine to determine how safe their data will be on their systems.
I'm not convinced. Governments are very bad at writing software - google for NIRS2 or the disasterous ambulance dispatching system, or air traffic control or any other major software project the government has done recently. What would they do with Windows source code if they got it?
People run Linux because they've bought into the idea that "many eyes make all bugs shallow". Problem is, everyone trusts everyone else to do it, and no-one does! If security is what you're into, you need an OS that has been audited line-by-line, like OpenBSD.
Actually, those are the only 2 programs that earn money for Microsoft, all others (XBox, MSN, WinCE, mice, keyboards...) lose money for them
Do you have a (credible) source for that? Sure, Xbox is losing money, but that was the plan all along for the first few years, and MSN is probably losing money too, after all the original business plan didn't account for the Internet but was based on dialup and content, a la AOL or Compuserve.
But what about SQL Server and Visual Studio? Are they really losing money on those too?
Google is wildly profitable too, although Overture breaks a little better than even, hence so much attention by the media. Google has little real "competition", rather "imitators".
Do you have a source for that? They aren't publicly traded, so they're under no obligation to publish quarterly results. They might be profitable, they might not be - but the landscape is littered with the remains of companies who gave away their product or service for free.
I'd definitely donate a buck or two a month to google, I'm pretty sure a lot of people would. If they setup a voluntary donation bin I would bet it would make a substantial amount of money.
Google do have paid services, like Answers. If you want to give them some money, consider using one of these.
But it does. By providing security, enforcement of contracts, roads, public transportation, and a countless other services.
It provides the same service to everyone, it doesn't matter how much they contribute or how much they benefit.
Nobody is asking for that. I am simply stating that those people who earn 90% of the income ought to pay 90% of the income taxes. What is wrong with that?
Nothing at all. I read in the NYT today that the top 1% of Americans earn 18% of the money, but pay 25% of the taxes. And in the Washington Post the other day, it said that 5% of Americans pay 41% of the taxes.
I simply think that everyone who receives an equal service from the government should contribute an equal amount to it. What is wrong with that?:-)
It depends on your scale of thinking. On a global scale it is a zero sum game. In the end the economy depends on natural resources like fuel, food, clean water, minerals etc. Since those resources are not infinite neither is the global economy. If your scale of thinking is the entire planet then econimics is a zero sum game.
I don't think that's true. At the most basic level, it isn't, because the planet is not a closed thermodynamic system. A fully-grown plant is worth more than a seed, but the energy, from the perspective of Earth, is free. You can cut down a tree, build something, and wait for the tree to grow back and build something else. If you have energy, clean water is essentially unlimited, unless you actually need the entire volume of the ocean for something.
Plus, value is added through new combinations of a finite amount of resources. An old Model T is worth more than a pile of iron ore - and a modern car is worth more than several Model Ts, and it could be made from them. True, once you burn oil it's gone, but metals can be reused indefinitely.
In the UK, there are laws about broadcasting political material during (and I believe immediately preceding?) an election
I don't know about any laws, but there is certainly an unwritten rule that the BBC will broadcast whatever political material the Labour party tell it to.
Do you know what percentage of the california income they are earning? Usually the to 10% makes over 90% of the money and pays only 75% of the taxes. A pretty good deal if you ask me.
Only if you assume that the local government directly facilitates them making the money in the first place.
If the economically productive residents of CA did not exist, the poor would not be richer, rather the entire state would be poorer. Economics is not a zero-sum game.
A growing percentage of that energy is produced from renewable sources (solar, wind, tidal, etc).
You can double $VERY_SMALL_NUMBER, and it's only $SLIGHTLY_LARGER_NUMBER.
Interestingly, a coal fired power station releases way more radiation into the air than a nuclear station, in addition to the pollution that everyone worries about, from isotopes within the coal itself. If a nuclear station released that much radiation it would be closed down!
Solar, wind and tidal will never be enough - the energy density is simply too low. You would have to ring the UK with tidal generators, and cover every square mile of farmland with wind farms and solar panels before you could even come close to supporting the UK's energy needs. The money invested in these schemes is wasted, and should be diverted to fusion research. And so should a chunk of the military budget - no need to fight wars in the Middle East if you can get your power from a substance found in seawater.
Because it will reduce pollution and improve the quality of life for all of us? Not sure what a flake is (yank term?) but it sounds pretty good to me.
Dharma from Dharma & Greg and Phoebe from Friends are examples of flakes. Generally well meaning, but clueless.
How long will take to implement these types of vehicles in America? I'm betting it will be difficult to break the special-interest deathgrip that Big Oil has on America.
Why do you say that? Who do you suppose will be "Big Hydrogen" if these sorts of vehicles become popular? Exactly the same people who are Big Oil now, after all, they already have the refineries, the distribution network, and the retail outlets.
The real threat to Big Oil comes from pure electric vehicles - and even then, Big Oil can still sell to power generators. Infact, it might even be better for them, as they won't have to carry their retail operations.
but I prepare for the typical halts to progress that corporations often impose.
Pretty much every useful piece of technology was developed by a private corporation. Don't try to tell me about NASA - velcro could have been developed a hell of a lot more cheaply if they hadn't had to fund orbital missions to do it! If anything holds progress back, it's governments, who make entire industries wait while they dither. The next tech revolution will be biotech, and the Western governments are doing their level best to drive it offshore with their heavy-handed regulations!
Uh, yeah it is. Honda's been making cars that'll do 120mph with less than 90hp for decades. 97mph is a joke. Then again, I've never fully understood why cars in the US can go 120mph which is double the old national speed limit.
Because infernal combustion engines and their associated machinery like gearboxes aren't efficient when run near the upper or lower limits of their capability, but in the middle. Upper is defined here as maximum rpm, not torque (which occurs closer to the middle rpm), and lower is the idle rpm. Car gearboxes aren't like aero engines; there is a direct relationship between engine rpm and wheel rpm via the gearbox.
If you want a car that runs well at 60mph, you have to built one that peaks at 120.
If you think that a woman deserves to be raped because she is wearing a low-cut top or her pants are little too tight, then you have some serious problems and should be taken out of society immediately.
No, I don't think anyone should be assaulted for what they wear. I don't think someone should be mugged either, just because their wallet or cellphone is in their hand. Hell, I've seen on the news people getting mugged for their shoes!
But I am aware, as you should be too, that that viewpoint isn't universal. There are streets in London I won't walk down while talking on my phone. In some parts of town, I'm careful not to show a wallet full of cash. These are just basic precautions that everyone should take. But it's taboo to say that dressing so as not to draw attention is one of the basic precautions, and that is a double standard.
This is the same moronic argument rapists used to use in court. 'She was dressed provacatively.' 'She didn't fight back, she must have wanted it.'
If a man wearing the colours of one football team walks into a pub full of supporters of a rival team after his team's just beaten them, then should he get into a fight? No, but in reality, if he did most people would say he should have been more careful. Why does society think it's OK for a man to be assaulted for what he's wearing but not a woman?
Slashdot Mirror
I have yet to see MOM (message oriented middleware) offerings on Linux
If you have Oracle on Linux you can use AQ, and others have mentioned IBM's MQSeries. Also there is a pure Java one called SonicMQ but I've never used it.
Well, in fairness, this could happen even if Mac OS X itself weren't proprietary, as iTunes still could be. For that matter, iCommune still is, too. Hm, none of that makes me feel any better ...
So we have a proprietary product on a proprietary OS using a proprietary service.
Why exactly did you post this article? What's it got to do with anything?
I am not racist and really like the fact that India is breeding smart hardworking engineers, but wish they were payed decent salaries for their sake and our own sake.
But they are paid decent salaries. Currency works like anything else, supply and demand. Lots of people want dollars, so dollars go up in value relative to other currencies. Or Euros, Sterling, Swiss Francs, Yen, etc. These are the "hard" currencies, because you can use them to do cross border business (among other reasons). You can't use Rupees for this, so the value of Rupees relative to dollars goes down (because Indians are converting Rupees to hard currencies so they can import stuff).
The effect of this is that in dollar terms, India is very cheap - an Indian on $4/hr doesn't need to work a whole hour to afford a cup of coffee, like an American on the same dollar salary would! The Indians are getting paid in, and spending, their local currency.
Anyone who claims Indians on $4/hr are getting exploited doesn't know what they are talking about and should be dismissed out of hand.
Those thinking of pointy-clicky interfaces being a magic wand should go and try writing bubblesort with mouse.
Why would you want to? No-one in the real world ever writes a sorting algorithm. If you want it sorted, add ORDER BY to your SQL and you're done. 90% of software development is about getting data into and out of databases in different ways, and doing some processing on it along the way. The complexity is not in the code itself, it's in the real-world problem the code is written to solve.
You're right that non-boilerplate code can't be automated, but the amount of work that is non-boilerplate is relatively small, particularly in terms of lines of code. I've written apps that maybe 60% were pure GUI code, just creating widgets and adding them to forms, etc. Maybe 30% more is just the initialization, connect to DB, open files stuff that's the same between most apps, just calls to libraries. That leaves 10% new code. Using RAD and CASE and c'n'p reduces development time to a fraction.
Outfits like this are not fly by night charlies that churn out crap, they are some of the best in the world. We (software professionals) will either step up to the plate and hit a home run and prove our worth or we will get run over like textiles and electronic manufacturing.
Consulting firms (I used to work for one) have a technique called the bait-and-switch. Here's how it works. You send a team packed with your most experienced technologists and best-dressed MBAs to do the pitch. It's never actually written down anywhere, but you try to convince the mark that these are the people that will be working for them. Then once the deal is signed, you send in a bunch of 22-year-olds on their first real project to do the work, in fact to learn how to do the work, on the mark's dime.
That's how it is here. Do you seriously think everyone of Wipro's 15,000 developers is as good as the shuttle team, who are no more than a few dozen, handpicked and rigorously trained? No... the CMM5 types will be wheeled out for pitches and soundbites, then quickly shuttled off to the next prospective client.
Wipro has Level 5 certication in three different categories. It's eye-glazing stuff, but an amazing achievement.
I find it impossible to believe that every one of Wipro's 15,000 developers is capable of writing code to this standard.
Maybe Wipro have 3 teams of a few dozen or so elite programmers who work on very well-defined long term projects, where the software has one specific job to do and everyone on the team has a decade's worth of familiarity with the codebase. But the rank and file are likely to be about as talented as the rank and file at EDS or CSC.
And by doing so, the "rich world" will eventually give away so much work that they will be poor.
Historically, that's a fallacy. How many farmers are there in the US now as a percentage of the population compared to a century ago? Is the country richer or poorer now? Standards of living have gone up over the last 50 years, despite the auto industry moving overseas. Did you know that textiles was once a high-tech industry, and textile manufacturing technology was a jealously guarded secret? Where are all the textile workers now, and is the country richer or poorer since they left?
Multiply that by the number of people who earn a living here in the U.S. by writing code, and where does that leave us?
What about all the people who earned a living cleaning out stables? The country is wealthier now that those people's jobs were obsoleted by the car - and funnily, there weren't hordes of unemployed stablehands, they just went to do something else.
Don't you see that this is 100% different than the 1980s? In the 80s, employers were loyal to employees.
Can you back that up with something other than mere nostalgia?
In general employers are as loyal to employees as employees are to employers. If someone gets a better offer (more money, fewer hours, shorter commute, whatever) they will happily resign and go take up the offer - effectively sacking their employer and getting a new one. That's as it should be, because it forces companies to compete for the best employees. And similarly, there is competition for the best employers, which happens whenever more than one person applies for a job.
This WOULD all blow over if our companies weren't taking advantage of the cheap labor over there. As it stands, it will continue to rack us in the nuts until our salaries match the ones in India.
Or until their salaries match yours, which is far more likely.
Globalization = cheap shirts, fewer jobs, and a fast-paced race to the bottom.
Bad news for shirt makers, good news for shirt wearers.
some stupid errors like saying developers code with UML
These days you can "program" in UML. The actual underlying code is C++ or Java generated by the CASE tool from your UML diagrams, but it's still programming, just at a higher level. For example, instead of programmatically declaring a member variable of a class, you click on the UML class diagram and add a property, instead of typing class Z extends X you drag a line.
You usually have to go to real code to actually implement methods, but using a RAD tool to layout your GUI, a CASE tool to do all the object defintions and database connectivity, only writing code by hand when you have to, is a very productive way to work. Programming Swing or Motif or MFC is very repetitive and can be highly automated, as can writing wrapper code for database tables to present them cleanly to objects.
You'll get a lot of geeks sneering that a text editor is the only way to write code, but that is an obsolete way of working. Computers are built to automate repetitive tasks, and once you've written one form or report by hand to show that you can, doing it again is just a waste of time.
For one, the governments arn't as trusting with the OS as MS would like. That's why you hear stories that government agencies already have many systems or are looking have having many systems running linux which they can freely view and examine to determine how safe their data will be on their systems.
I'm not convinced. Governments are very bad at writing software - google for NIRS2 or the disasterous ambulance dispatching system, or air traffic control or any other major software project the government has done recently. What would they do with Windows source code if they got it?
People run Linux because they've bought into the idea that "many eyes make all bugs shallow". Problem is, everyone trusts everyone else to do it, and no-one does! If security is what you're into, you need an OS that has been audited line-by-line, like OpenBSD.
Actually, those are the only 2 programs that earn money for Microsoft, all others (XBox, MSN, WinCE, mice, keyboards...) lose money for them
Do you have a (credible) source for that? Sure, Xbox is losing money, but that was the plan all along for the first few years, and MSN is probably losing money too, after all the original business plan didn't account for the Internet but was based on dialup and content, a la AOL or Compuserve.
But what about SQL Server and Visual Studio? Are they really losing money on those too?
Can any slashdotter out there provide a search engine that yields (in your opinion) a more accurate result for a given phrase?
Northern Light was as good, but they got out of the public search engine business and into defence contracting, IIRC.
Google is wildly profitable too, although Overture breaks a little better than even, hence so much attention by the media. Google has little real "competition", rather "imitators".
Do you have a source for that? They aren't publicly traded, so they're under no obligation to publish quarterly results. They might be profitable, they might not be - but the landscape is littered with the remains of companies who gave away their product or service for free.
I'd definitely donate a buck or two a month to google, I'm pretty sure a lot of people would. If they setup a voluntary donation bin I would bet it would make a substantial amount of money.
Google do have paid services, like Answers. If you want to give them some money, consider using one of these.
But it does. By providing security, enforcement of contracts, roads, public transportation, and a countless other services.
:-)
It provides the same service to everyone, it doesn't matter how much they contribute or how much they benefit.
Nobody is asking for that. I am simply stating that those people who earn 90% of the income ought to pay 90% of the income taxes. What is wrong with that?
Nothing at all. I read in the NYT today that the top 1% of Americans earn 18% of the money, but pay 25% of the taxes. And in the Washington Post the other day, it said that 5% of Americans pay 41% of the taxes.
I simply think that everyone who receives an equal service from the government should contribute an equal amount to it. What is wrong with that?
It depends on your scale of thinking. On a global scale it is a zero sum game. In the end the economy depends on natural resources like fuel, food, clean water, minerals etc. Since those resources are not infinite neither is the global economy. If your scale of thinking is the entire planet then econimics is a zero sum game.
I don't think that's true. At the most basic level, it isn't, because the planet is not a closed thermodynamic system. A fully-grown plant is worth more than a seed, but the energy, from the perspective of Earth, is free. You can cut down a tree, build something, and wait for the tree to grow back and build something else. If you have energy, clean water is essentially unlimited, unless you actually need the entire volume of the ocean for something.
Plus, value is added through new combinations of a finite amount of resources. An old Model T is worth more than a pile of iron ore - and a modern car is worth more than several Model Ts, and it could be made from them. True, once you burn oil it's gone, but metals can be reused indefinitely.
Microwave clothes before wearing.
Or indeed, everything. If they can put it unobtrusively into a Snickers wrapper, what's to stop them putting it into the bar itself?
Can't say I have. What happens in said scenes? Something with a vibrating phone?
A phone, some lingerie and a rabbi. It's very funny.
In the UK, there are laws about broadcasting political material during (and I believe immediately preceding?) an election
I don't know about any laws, but there is certainly an unwritten rule that the BBC will broadcast whatever political material the Labour party tell it to.
Do you know what percentage of the california income they are earning? Usually the to 10% makes over 90% of the money and pays only 75% of the taxes. A pretty good deal if you ask me.
Only if you assume that the local government directly facilitates them making the money in the first place.
If the economically productive residents of CA did not exist, the poor would not be richer, rather the entire state would be poorer. Economics is not a zero-sum game.
Think of the vibration options!
I take it you've seen the deleted scenes from Keeping The Faith then?
A growing percentage of that energy is produced from renewable sources (solar, wind, tidal, etc).
You can double $VERY_SMALL_NUMBER, and it's only $SLIGHTLY_LARGER_NUMBER.
Interestingly, a coal fired power station releases way more radiation into the air than a nuclear station, in addition to the pollution that everyone worries about, from isotopes within the coal itself. If a nuclear station released that much radiation it would be closed down!
Solar, wind and tidal will never be enough - the energy density is simply too low. You would have to ring the UK with tidal generators, and cover every square mile of farmland with wind farms and solar panels before you could even come close to supporting the UK's energy needs. The money invested in these schemes is wasted, and should be diverted to fusion research. And so should a chunk of the military budget - no need to fight wars in the Middle East if you can get your power from a substance found in seawater.
Because it will reduce pollution and improve the quality of life for all of us? Not sure what a flake is (yank term?) but it sounds pretty good to me.
Dharma from Dharma & Greg and Phoebe from Friends are examples of flakes. Generally well meaning, but clueless.
How long will take to implement these types of vehicles in America? I'm betting it will be difficult to break the special-interest deathgrip that Big Oil has on America.
Why do you say that? Who do you suppose will be "Big Hydrogen" if these sorts of vehicles become popular? Exactly the same people who are Big Oil now, after all, they already have the refineries, the distribution network, and the retail outlets.
The real threat to Big Oil comes from pure electric vehicles - and even then, Big Oil can still sell to power generators. Infact, it might even be better for them, as they won't have to carry their retail operations.
but I prepare for the typical halts to progress that corporations often impose.
Pretty much every useful piece of technology was developed by a private corporation. Don't try to tell me about NASA - velcro could have been developed a hell of a lot more cheaply if they hadn't had to fund orbital missions to do it! If anything holds progress back, it's governments, who make entire industries wait while they dither. The next tech revolution will be biotech, and the Western governments are doing their level best to drive it offshore with their heavy-handed regulations!
Uh, yeah it is. Honda's been making cars that'll do 120mph with less than 90hp for decades. 97mph is a joke. Then again, I've never fully understood why cars in the US can go 120mph which is double the old national speed limit.
Because infernal combustion engines and their associated machinery like gearboxes aren't efficient when run near the upper or lower limits of their capability, but in the middle. Upper is defined here as maximum rpm, not torque (which occurs closer to the middle rpm), and lower is the idle rpm. Car gearboxes aren't like aero engines; there is a direct relationship between engine rpm and wheel rpm via the gearbox.
If you want a car that runs well at 60mph, you have to built one that peaks at 120.
If you think that a woman deserves to be raped because she is wearing a low-cut top or her pants are little too tight, then you have some serious problems and should be taken out of society immediately.
No, I don't think anyone should be assaulted for what they wear. I don't think someone should be mugged either, just because their wallet or cellphone is in their hand. Hell, I've seen on the news people getting mugged for their shoes!
But I am aware, as you should be too, that that viewpoint isn't universal. There are streets in London I won't walk down while talking on my phone. In some parts of town, I'm careful not to show a wallet full of cash. These are just basic precautions that everyone should take. But it's taboo to say that dressing so as not to draw attention is one of the basic precautions, and that is a double standard.
This is the same moronic argument rapists used to use in court. 'She was dressed provacatively.' 'She didn't fight back, she must have wanted it.'
If a man wearing the colours of one football team walks into a pub full of supporters of a rival team after his team's just beaten them, then should he get into a fight? No, but in reality, if he did most people would say he should have been more careful. Why does society think it's OK for a man to be assaulted for what he's wearing but not a woman?