That's pretty crappy. On my '05 Volvo (and I'm pretty sure the design is the same up to about '13), to change any of the bulbs, you open the hood, pull a metal stake out with your fingers, then slide the entire headlight housing out sideways. Then you can pop off the wire harness, and the bulbs are easily changed at that point. It's not quite as easy as cars where you can just reach down and change them, but it's not hard and doesn't even require tools.
As for your single-use fasteners, you can get similar (but reusable) nylon fasteners at Lowe's or Home Depot in the hardware section. They come in a range of sizes, and I'm sure one of them would fit fine.
Why would you buy the housing AND the ballast? The chances of both of those failing simultaneously are astronomical.
You can buy aftermarket HID ballasts for dirt cheap, or just get used OEM ones on Ebay. There aren't that many different kinds. The housing is another matter, since that's vehicle-specific, but unless you've been in a crash, you shouldn't ever need to replace that.
Another big difference I forgot to add: the EPA changed the methodology for calculating MPG back in 2006 or 2008. The test is tougher now, with A/C on all the time (it was off in earlier tests), so the same car will score several mpg lower using the new testing regime.
The problem is the modern, computer on wheels vehicles where everything is integrated into a network and your car refuses to start when it notices the gas cap hasn't been screwed in completely.
Hmm, I just ran into this problem on my (highly-networked) 2005 Volvo, where my wife apparently didn't screw the gas cap on tight enough and it came off while driving. It ran just fine, it just lit up the check-engine light. I plugged in my handy little OBDII scan tool, it showed a code about a large EVAP leak, I checked the gas cap and found it sitting inside the little gas cap compartment, cleared the code with my scantool and everything's fine.
OBDII is a wonderful thing. I do wish they had made the standard a little better, with fewer ways for automakers to insert proprietary BS in there, but it's great otherwise. You just couldn't do this stuff on older cars; with OBDI, every make had a different manufacturer-specific scan tool.
3: Still another vehicle manufacturer, from overseas only warrants their vehicles to run B5. Well, guess what... you may encounter random gas stations and states which mandate all the way to B20. Fill that vehicle up with that type of diesel fuel, and the ECM will flag the warranty as voided, throw a check engine light, then go into limp-home mode (max speed 20 mph) until the fuel is drained and the dealer plugs in a device. The dealer might just demand all injectors and the high pressure fuel pump be replaced just for giggles until he resets the ECM as well.
Um, I don't see the problem with this one. Manufacturers have every right to require you to use a certain type of fuel; if you put diesel in your gasoline car, do you think the dealership is going to fix that mess for free? Yeah, it sucks that the grades of diesel available in the US are shit; in Europe, they use better diesel, and their cars are designed for it. That's a good reason not to buy a diesel car in America.
The other things are indeed BS, especially the battery thing. One requirement of any automotive electronic module is that it has protection on the power bus, to protect against overvoltage and even installing the battery backwards, and also something called a "load dump", where some moron disconnects the battery while the engine is running. This circuit protection has been standard for decades. Generally, you can satisfy these requirements with a rectifier diode on the input and a TVS (transient voltage suppressor) diode).
The automakers have tried this before. The US federal government had to step in and fix it, with the Magnusson-Moss Warranty Act, which makes it illegal for automakers to require you to use their dealerships or parts, or to deny your warranty claims based on this, unless they can prove the non-OEM part caused the problem or they give you the parts for free. (This also includes fluids; some automakers tried to insist that not using their $$$ manufacturer-branded oil or coolant was grounds for denying a warranty claim.)
Thanks to the DMCA, they're trying this shit all over again. Thanks a lot, Clinton.
it is not obvious to me that there's been significant improvement in gas engines over the past 20 or 30 years. I don't see a lot of similarly-sized new cars that do better than - or even as good as - my old beater.
It's not obvious to you because you aren't paying attention and looking at all the variables. New cars are different from early 90s cars in two big ways:
1) weight. 1a) crashworthiness: a new car will let you walk away from horrific crashes which your '93 POS will kill you. That alone should get you to dump that old heap. However, that crashworthiness comes at a price: cars are heavier than they used to be, usually by at least 500 pounds. Those 80s econoboxes were really small and light; you can't get anything that light any more. 1b) soundproofness: new cars are much quieter inside than your '93 POS. You're probably deaf now because all the interior noise in that thing. However, again this comes at a cost: the soundproofing adds weight. It used to be that only expensive luxury cars like Mercedes had this stuff, but now even $25k regular cars are super-quiet inside.
2) horsepower. New cars have a LOT more horsepower than your old '93 POS. Even "economy" cars are fast now. Back in the 80s, it was normal for an economy sedan to have 90HP and take 15 seconds to get to 60mph. Not any more; even "economy" cars now have sub-10s 0-60 times, and "regular" sedans can do it in 7-8s, which used to be sports car territory in the 80s-90s. No one wants slow cars any more, and in fact they can be considered dangerous since they can't merge properly. But again, this comes at a price: fuel economy.
New cars with GDI engines have truly impressive fuel-economy numbers these days, being able to push 3200-pound cars around with 200+ HP while still getting 37mpg.
I will admit that MGM isn't as bad as FGM (plus, there's different degrees of FGM), but trying to say MGM is a good idea because of this is like saying chopping off your forefinger isn't as bad as chopping off your whole hand, so let's chop babies' forefingers off.
However, I will point out that it isn't "society" which thinks it's OK to mutilate young boys, it's American society (and Jewish culture too). The rest of western culture doesn't share America's puritanical sensibilities.
Remember, the entire reason America is so big on circumcision is because Dr. Kellogg in the Victorian Era pushed it as a way to discourage young boys from masturbating.
Um, I don't think they're using those in any modern headlights yet, except maybe for a handful of high-end luxury models perhaps. They still aren't installing xenon headlights on "normal" cars yet, only on the higher-end (30k+) models. They've come down some, but the $15-25k segment still uses old-fashioned halogens.
And xenon headlights are pretty easy and cheap to fix, at least if it's just the bulb; the bulbs are readily replaceable, no different than the halogens.
The problem is that the government has pay grades. Fixed tiers of compensation. Those tiers work fine for most people. They're fucking useless for anyone exceptional that must be paid significantly more.
Why? Regular large corporations do pretty much the same thing with their engineers, and it works fine. They have "Engineer I", "Engineer II", "Engineer III", "Senior Engineer I", "Principal Engineer", etc. When someone gets promoted to a higher level, that puts them in a higher pay grade. Yeah, the corporations have pay ranges for those positions rather than fixed, exact dollar amounts, but the principle is the same. The government could do exactly the same thing.
No, this won't work for positions which are entirely up to negotiation. Most technical positions do not need to be like this. They just need to have pay grades and actually pay competitively with private industry.
Quote me, bitch.... Can none of you fucks
Yeah, that's a great way to converse with people. Do you talk this way at work?
The exception is high demand labor of any kind. Someone able to run a company as CEO is going to get more money in the private sector than in the government's employ.
I don't think we're talking about overpaid suits here, we're talking about engineers and other technical people. The government is not known to pay them well either.
All those office workers are being paid better in DC than anywhere else in the country.
So basically a bunch of incompetent paper-pushers are being given largesse by the rest of the nation, and the economies in the rest of the nation would be better off if they seceded from the federal government, since they wouldn't have to spend so much funding all that waste?
If you don't get the employees you need for other parts of the organization to work properly, then people die (because the military missions fail). You don't get the employees you need if you don't pay enough.
What do you think feminists (or anyone, for that matter) can realistically do about women living in oppressive conditions outside of the West?
What are you talking about? FGM is done in the west in huge numbers, by immigrants from those countries sending their kids back there to mutilated. No one wants to do much about it because it's "racist".
No, men need to be prepared for dangerous jobs like working on crab boats and oil rigs, and in general kept away from society. At least, that seems to be the goal...
The no-sports part is a good thing, because American schools tend to over-emphasize sports to an absurd degree. The rest is bad, especially the lack of music. IIRC, there's a lot of evidence of high correlation between people gifted in STEM stuff and musical ability.
It would be nice if they could have some sports, the way for instance prestigious English universities have them (such as with rowing). But we just can't seem to do that over here; it's all football and basketball, and then it becomes all-important, with leagues and competitions between different schools, and then cheerleaders. If I were setting up a school, I'd ban football and basketball and only allow sports like rowing, track & field, cycling, and other sports which don't seem to draw large crowds of drunken, rowdy, moronic fans.
I'm not a feminist, but if a someone wants to start a girls school...what's the problem?
There's two big problems:
1) This appears to be a *taxpayer-funded* school. If you want to establish some weird-ass exclusionary school and fund it all yourself, you have that right: lots of wacky religions do exactly this. It sucks for the poor kids being brainwashed by that BS, but at least it isn't condoned by the government and the rest of us taxpayers.
2) This entirely smacks of "separate but equal". What's next, separate public schools for blacks and whites? Aren't we supposed to be progressing from the backwardness of the 1950s?
And, honestly, if I could send my daughters (of which I have 3) in the hopes that they appreciate tech more than cheerleading, boys, and fashion, I would do it in a *heartbeat*
If you're worried about that, the answer is simple: private school. There's usually good private non-religious schools around that you can send your kids to where they don't have a lot of that crap. The reason you get all that crap is because public schools have to take everyone, so it's a by-product of the overall culture of the community you're in. It's no different than why The Kardashians and Honey Boo Boo are popular TV shows.
Just overcoming the "helpless-fashion-model-princess-homemaker" mental conditioning is hard enough
How is that hard? You're the parents, and kids get this mental conditioning mostly from their parents and their relatives. So if you don't agree with that mentality, don't teach your kids that way, don't let them be around any relatives like that, don't buy them Disney movies that teach this, and don't get involved in any religious groups that teach that crap. You're the ones in control; start acting like it.
Wait, the school is pushing him to stay *out of* STEM just because he does poorly in English and Spanish?
And who gives a shit about Spanish anyway? That's probably the most useless language there is for STEM. How many Spanish engineers have you ever met? Latinos are infamous for not going into STEM fields, even worse than blacks probably. If you want to learn languages to help your engineering career, the languages to learn are English (of course), Mandarin, Japanese, and German (not necessarily in that order). That's where all the engineering is being done these days. Spanish is a great language to learn, however, if you want to make a career in drug trafficking. Did your son have a choice about that, or is Spanish now required in school?
The women are discouraged by their parents and relatives from the time they're born. They're told that their role in life is to get married and have children, and that's it. Their parents never buy them LEGOs or any other toys that encourage technical thinking, instead they buy them dollhouses. From birth to adulthood, this brainwashing has a huge effect; even if a women is mentally inclined this way, she gets zero support from her parents and doesn't really have much of an opportunity to go into a field she might have a lot of interest in.
I don't really see what can be done to fix it. Some special schools at the high-school level are much too late to make much of a difference; by the time a child is that old, it's unlikely you're going to fix them. They need to start at the pre-school level, but our education system is much too incompetent to really make a difference there.
However, it is interesting that the people whining the most about this problem are people who never went into engineering themselves.
Exactly, it starts with their parents. You can't easily fix that with special schools at the high-school level; by that time, all that thinking is ingrained. Let's face it: our parents in this society all suck. And all these people who really want to fix this problem, are they having any kids themselves? Doubtful. So what we have is all the most conservative people are having all the kids, and passing their values on to them.
This girls-only school isn't the answer. The problem is our culture, which is fundamentally backwards and broken. By the time you get to high-school level schools, kids are already set on the track they're going to take. If they really want to fix this problem, the solution is to end private parenting, and have all the parenting done by the state. This proposal has more than a few problems with it....
I think we just need to be honest with ourselves and admit we as a culture aren't really much better than ISIS and other Islamic extremists. We hate intellectualism, we hate education, we hate learning (unless it's religious in nature), we love driving around in pickup trucks with guns and smashing things and setting things on fire.
Children don't just do what they want to do; they're molded by their environment, and at early ages, that means their parents.
There's lots of women in STEM jobs in other cultures, notably Indian and Chinese societies. Not so in American society. The answer is simple: it's the parents. Our parents are pushing girls to avoid these subjects. This shouldn't be surprising when most of the people actually having kids in our society are ultra-conservative religious nuts.
IANAL, but I don't think that's correct at all. Offing a security guard is still "normal" murder, and just one step below premediated murder.
As I understand it, "felony murder" is where someone dies as a result of your felony crime, even though you didn't intend it (this is the key). So, a good example is that you and your buddy go rob an armored car. You don't actually want to hurt anyone, but you look to the armed guards like you might, so they shoot at you in self-defense. Your buddy gets killed by shots from the armed guards. You survive, and you're now prosecuted for the "felony murder" of your buddy: even though it was the armed guard who actually killed him, your felonious actions led directly to his death.
Another example would be committing some crime with your buddy, and he gets killed totally by accident during the crime; maybe you're breaking into a bank or something, and he gets killed by shattered glass in the process.
Actually, it gets better: 3 of those 4 years is only because he didn't register the aircraft properly (according to TFS). Violating national security airspace is apparently only a misdemeanor, and worth only 1 year in prison at most.
Slashdot Mirror
That's pretty crappy. On my '05 Volvo (and I'm pretty sure the design is the same up to about '13), to change any of the bulbs, you open the hood, pull a metal stake out with your fingers, then slide the entire headlight housing out sideways. Then you can pop off the wire harness, and the bulbs are easily changed at that point. It's not quite as easy as cars where you can just reach down and change them, but it's not hard and doesn't even require tools.
As for your single-use fasteners, you can get similar (but reusable) nylon fasteners at Lowe's or Home Depot in the hardware section. They come in a range of sizes, and I'm sure one of them would fit fine.
Why would you buy the housing AND the ballast? The chances of both of those failing simultaneously are astronomical.
You can buy aftermarket HID ballasts for dirt cheap, or just get used OEM ones on Ebay. There aren't that many different kinds. The housing is another matter, since that's vehicle-specific, but unless you've been in a crash, you shouldn't ever need to replace that.
Another big difference I forgot to add: the EPA changed the methodology for calculating MPG back in 2006 or 2008. The test is tougher now, with A/C on all the time (it was off in earlier tests), so the same car will score several mpg lower using the new testing regime.
The problem is the modern, computer on wheels vehicles where everything is integrated into a network and your car refuses to start when it notices the gas cap hasn't been screwed in completely.
Hmm, I just ran into this problem on my (highly-networked) 2005 Volvo, where my wife apparently didn't screw the gas cap on tight enough and it came off while driving. It ran just fine, it just lit up the check-engine light. I plugged in my handy little OBDII scan tool, it showed a code about a large EVAP leak, I checked the gas cap and found it sitting inside the little gas cap compartment, cleared the code with my scantool and everything's fine.
OBDII is a wonderful thing. I do wish they had made the standard a little better, with fewer ways for automakers to insert proprietary BS in there, but it's great otherwise. You just couldn't do this stuff on older cars; with OBDI, every make had a different manufacturer-specific scan tool.
3: Still another vehicle manufacturer, from overseas only warrants their vehicles to run B5. Well, guess what... you may encounter random gas stations and states which mandate all the way to B20. Fill that vehicle up with that type of diesel fuel, and the ECM will flag the warranty as voided, throw a check engine light, then go into limp-home mode (max speed 20 mph) until the fuel is drained and the dealer plugs in a device. The dealer might just demand all injectors and the high pressure fuel pump be replaced just for giggles until he resets the ECM as well.
Um, I don't see the problem with this one. Manufacturers have every right to require you to use a certain type of fuel; if you put diesel in your gasoline car, do you think the dealership is going to fix that mess for free? Yeah, it sucks that the grades of diesel available in the US are shit; in Europe, they use better diesel, and their cars are designed for it. That's a good reason not to buy a diesel car in America.
The other things are indeed BS, especially the battery thing. One requirement of any automotive electronic module is that it has protection on the power bus, to protect against overvoltage and even installing the battery backwards, and also something called a "load dump", where some moron disconnects the battery while the engine is running. This circuit protection has been standard for decades. Generally, you can satisfy these requirements with a rectifier diode on the input and a TVS (transient voltage suppressor) diode).
People have already been "rolling their own ECUs" for a couple decades now.
The Federal Magnusson-Moss Warranty Act should prevent any such state laws from being enforced.
The automakers have tried this before. The US federal government had to step in and fix it, with the Magnusson-Moss Warranty Act, which makes it illegal for automakers to require you to use their dealerships or parts, or to deny your warranty claims based on this, unless they can prove the non-OEM part caused the problem or they give you the parts for free. (This also includes fluids; some automakers tried to insist that not using their $$$ manufacturer-branded oil or coolant was grounds for denying a warranty claim.)
Thanks to the DMCA, they're trying this shit all over again. Thanks a lot, Clinton.
it is not obvious to me that there's been significant improvement in gas engines over the past 20 or 30 years. I don't see a lot of similarly-sized new cars that do better than - or even as good as - my old beater.
It's not obvious to you because you aren't paying attention and looking at all the variables. New cars are different from early 90s cars in two big ways:
1) weight. 1a) crashworthiness: a new car will let you walk away from horrific crashes which your '93 POS will kill you. That alone should get you to dump that old heap. However, that crashworthiness comes at a price: cars are heavier than they used to be, usually by at least 500 pounds. Those 80s econoboxes were really small and light; you can't get anything that light any more. 1b) soundproofness: new cars are much quieter inside than your '93 POS. You're probably deaf now because all the interior noise in that thing. However, again this comes at a cost: the soundproofing adds weight. It used to be that only expensive luxury cars like Mercedes had this stuff, but now even $25k regular cars are super-quiet inside.
2) horsepower. New cars have a LOT more horsepower than your old '93 POS. Even "economy" cars are fast now. Back in the 80s, it was normal for an economy sedan to have 90HP and take 15 seconds to get to 60mph. Not any more; even "economy" cars now have sub-10s 0-60 times, and "regular" sedans can do it in 7-8s, which used to be sports car territory in the 80s-90s. No one wants slow cars any more, and in fact they can be considered dangerous since they can't merge properly. But again, this comes at a price: fuel economy.
New cars with GDI engines have truly impressive fuel-economy numbers these days, being able to push 3200-pound cars around with 200+ HP while still getting 37mpg.
Exactly right.
I will admit that MGM isn't as bad as FGM (plus, there's different degrees of FGM), but trying to say MGM is a good idea because of this is like saying chopping off your forefinger isn't as bad as chopping off your whole hand, so let's chop babies' forefingers off.
However, I will point out that it isn't "society" which thinks it's OK to mutilate young boys, it's American society (and Jewish culture too). The rest of western culture doesn't share America's puritanical sensibilities.
Remember, the entire reason America is so big on circumcision is because Dr. Kellogg in the Victorian Era pushed it as a way to discourage young boys from masturbating.
Um, I don't think they're using those in any modern headlights yet, except maybe for a handful of high-end luxury models perhaps. They still aren't installing xenon headlights on "normal" cars yet, only on the higher-end (30k+) models. They've come down some, but the $15-25k segment still uses old-fashioned halogens.
And xenon headlights are pretty easy and cheap to fix, at least if it's just the bulb; the bulbs are readily replaceable, no different than the halogens.
The problem is that the government has pay grades. Fixed tiers of compensation. Those tiers work fine for most people. They're fucking useless for anyone exceptional that must be paid significantly more.
Why? Regular large corporations do pretty much the same thing with their engineers, and it works fine. They have "Engineer I", "Engineer II", "Engineer III", "Senior Engineer I", "Principal Engineer", etc. When someone gets promoted to a higher level, that puts them in a higher pay grade. Yeah, the corporations have pay ranges for those positions rather than fixed, exact dollar amounts, but the principle is the same. The government could do exactly the same thing.
No, this won't work for positions which are entirely up to negotiation. Most technical positions do not need to be like this. They just need to have pay grades and actually pay competitively with private industry.
Quote me, bitch. ... Can none of you fucks
Yeah, that's a great way to converse with people. Do you talk this way at work?
The exception is high demand labor of any kind. Someone able to run a company as CEO is going to get more money in the private sector than in the government's employ.
I don't think we're talking about overpaid suits here, we're talking about engineers and other technical people. The government is not known to pay them well either.
All those office workers are being paid better in DC than anywhere else in the country.
So basically a bunch of incompetent paper-pushers are being given largesse by the rest of the nation, and the economies in the rest of the nation would be better off if they seceded from the federal government, since they wouldn't have to spend so much funding all that waste?
If you don't get the employees you need for other parts of the organization to work properly, then people die (because the military missions fail). You don't get the employees you need if you don't pay enough.
What do you think feminists (or anyone, for that matter) can realistically do about women living in oppressive conditions outside of the West?
What are you talking about? FGM is done in the west in huge numbers, by immigrants from those countries sending their kids back there to mutilated. No one wants to do much about it because it's "racist".
No, men need to be prepared for dangerous jobs like working on crab boats and oil rigs, and in general kept away from society. At least, that seems to be the goal...
The no-sports part is a good thing, because American schools tend to over-emphasize sports to an absurd degree. The rest is bad, especially the lack of music. IIRC, there's a lot of evidence of high correlation between people gifted in STEM stuff and musical ability.
It would be nice if they could have some sports, the way for instance prestigious English universities have them (such as with rowing). But we just can't seem to do that over here; it's all football and basketball, and then it becomes all-important, with leagues and competitions between different schools, and then cheerleaders. If I were setting up a school, I'd ban football and basketball and only allow sports like rowing, track & field, cycling, and other sports which don't seem to draw large crowds of drunken, rowdy, moronic fans.
I'm not a feminist, but if a someone wants to start a girls school...what's the problem?
There's two big problems:
1) This appears to be a *taxpayer-funded* school. If you want to establish some weird-ass exclusionary school and fund it all yourself, you have that right: lots of wacky religions do exactly this. It sucks for the poor kids being brainwashed by that BS, but at least it isn't condoned by the government and the rest of us taxpayers.
2) This entirely smacks of "separate but equal". What's next, separate public schools for blacks and whites? Aren't we supposed to be progressing from the backwardness of the 1950s?
And, honestly, if I could send my daughters (of which I have 3) in the hopes that they appreciate tech more than cheerleading, boys, and fashion, I would do it in a *heartbeat*
If you're worried about that, the answer is simple: private school. There's usually good private non-religious schools around that you can send your kids to where they don't have a lot of that crap. The reason you get all that crap is because public schools have to take everyone, so it's a by-product of the overall culture of the community you're in. It's no different than why The Kardashians and Honey Boo Boo are popular TV shows.
Just overcoming the "helpless-fashion-model-princess-homemaker" mental conditioning is hard enough
How is that hard? You're the parents, and kids get this mental conditioning mostly from their parents and their relatives. So if you don't agree with that mentality, don't teach your kids that way, don't let them be around any relatives like that, don't buy them Disney movies that teach this, and don't get involved in any religious groups that teach that crap. You're the ones in control; start acting like it.
Wait, the school is pushing him to stay *out of* STEM just because he does poorly in English and Spanish?
And who gives a shit about Spanish anyway? That's probably the most useless language there is for STEM. How many Spanish engineers have you ever met? Latinos are infamous for not going into STEM fields, even worse than blacks probably. If you want to learn languages to help your engineering career, the languages to learn are English (of course), Mandarin, Japanese, and German (not necessarily in that order). That's where all the engineering is being done these days. Spanish is a great language to learn, however, if you want to make a career in drug trafficking. Did your son have a choice about that, or is Spanish now required in school?
The women are discouraged by their parents and relatives from the time they're born. They're told that their role in life is to get married and have children, and that's it. Their parents never buy them LEGOs or any other toys that encourage technical thinking, instead they buy them dollhouses. From birth to adulthood, this brainwashing has a huge effect; even if a women is mentally inclined this way, she gets zero support from her parents and doesn't really have much of an opportunity to go into a field she might have a lot of interest in.
I don't really see what can be done to fix it. Some special schools at the high-school level are much too late to make much of a difference; by the time a child is that old, it's unlikely you're going to fix them. They need to start at the pre-school level, but our education system is much too incompetent to really make a difference there.
However, it is interesting that the people whining the most about this problem are people who never went into engineering themselves.
Exactly, it starts with their parents. You can't easily fix that with special schools at the high-school level; by that time, all that thinking is ingrained. Let's face it: our parents in this society all suck. And all these people who really want to fix this problem, are they having any kids themselves? Doubtful. So what we have is all the most conservative people are having all the kids, and passing their values on to them.
[Stupid Slashdot, not letting me edit...]
This girls-only school isn't the answer. The problem is our culture, which is fundamentally backwards and broken. By the time you get to high-school level schools, kids are already set on the track they're going to take. If they really want to fix this problem, the solution is to end private parenting, and have all the parenting done by the state. This proposal has more than a few problems with it....
I think we just need to be honest with ourselves and admit we as a culture aren't really much better than ISIS and other Islamic extremists. We hate intellectualism, we hate education, we hate learning (unless it's religious in nature), we love driving around in pickup trucks with guns and smashing things and setting things on fire.
Children don't just do what they want to do; they're molded by their environment, and at early ages, that means their parents.
There's lots of women in STEM jobs in other cultures, notably Indian and Chinese societies. Not so in American society. The answer is simple: it's the parents. Our parents are pushing girls to avoid these subjects. This shouldn't be surprising when most of the people actually having kids in our society are ultra-conservative religious nuts.
IANAL, but I don't think that's correct at all. Offing a security guard is still "normal" murder, and just one step below premediated murder.
As I understand it, "felony murder" is where someone dies as a result of your felony crime, even though you didn't intend it (this is the key). So, a good example is that you and your buddy go rob an armored car. You don't actually want to hurt anyone, but you look to the armed guards like you might, so they shoot at you in self-defense. Your buddy gets killed by shots from the armed guards. You survive, and you're now prosecuted for the "felony murder" of your buddy: even though it was the armed guard who actually killed him, your felonious actions led directly to his death.
Another example would be committing some crime with your buddy, and he gets killed totally by accident during the crime; maybe you're breaking into a bank or something, and he gets killed by shattered glass in the process.
Actually, it gets better: 3 of those 4 years is only because he didn't register the aircraft properly (according to TFS). Violating national security airspace is apparently only a misdemeanor, and worth only 1 year in prison at most.