Or at least that's what it sounds like people are gonna start looking like with this getup.

Personally, I think I'll wait for next-generation Cyberbrains a la Ghost in the Shell.

Won't ever happen. If we tried that, Britain would come tapping us on the shoulder, and presenting a bill for all the trade secrets we lifted during the Industrial Revolution from them.

What China is doing to us is the same thing we've been done to other nations, albeit when this country was younger.

Shhhhh... Britain, keep your mouths shut and we'll float some your way.

I can live with either one more readily than doing nothing and taking it UTA.

It would be pretty damn interesting if the US turned around and told China, here's a bill for piracy, if you don't pay, we don't repay our debt. And what can you do, that we haven't already done to ourselves? Check and mate, and possibly nuclear holocaust in one easy move.

But as long as Americans don't understand why they shouldn't be shopping at Walmart, consistently vote against their own interests, and are too focused on the Jersey Shore, it'll never happen.

Looks like the US gets to add $500 billion worth of tariffs to imported Chinese products now.

And that is how we get out of debt!

Either that or World War III.

And today, a Very Special Mythbusters at the Large Hadron Collider!
Myth: Creating Strange Matter and allowing it to escape containment could cause the Earth to be completely converted to Strange Matter and end life as we know it!
Will it make a boom? Let's find out!
Coming soon December 12, 2012!

With Special Guest Host: Gordon Freeman!

At least until they "accidentally" create a singularity that destroys half a state, and permanently alters the rules of our relative space-time.

I still don't understand what motivation the "free market" has to ensure a chance at a better a life for everyone. A large class of cheap, desperate, un-educated labor, sounds better to a lot of businesses, than educated, aware of rights, and demands a living wage. We've tried Ron Paul's way before, whether they were Kings and Monarchs, or Robber-Barons. Sure, our current system is warped and broken, and needs a fix, but to throw away everything, even the regulations and safe-guards, that do work, will only bring us further backwards.

1) Yes, predators never hunt in packs, or cull packs. And zombie will obviouslt greate a stategy to keep everyone in the herd. sheesh

What predators are we talking about here? If we're discussing North America, or pretty much most of the industrialized world, there aren't too many pack predators that could overwhelm say a small mass of 30-40 zombies, before risking becoming lunch themselves.

2) "This assumes a lot about the physiology of an undead corpse is the same as a dead corpse. I can think of at least one reason why it isn't." such as? You assume complete change in the biology of the corpse..as well as physics.

I'm just saying a corpse that gets up after dying and tries to eat the living, is more than just the same as a regular dead corpse. For the sake of argument, there's a number of zombie films that take place years after the "outbreak" so theoretically the same laws of decay over time, aren't exactly in play here. Unless we're talking more a 28 Days Later thing.

3) Yeha, but theya re easy to kill.

When it comes down to it, unless you're a semi-experienced gun-user/soldier/cop, the typical person won't have a simple time with their first kill. And if they're bit in the process... Also, at the start, realistically, do you think most people would actually feel even remotely compelled to murder what they don't even understand is a fresh-eating corpse, rather than just try to restrain, or reason with someone who looks like the victim or a horrible accident?

5) Yes, but physics would normal mean the would ahve to stop, becasue there legs and arm would fall off. AS would their teeth. For some reason, zombies need to eat, but don't need any mechanizms for getting energy to their brain.

As long as its brain is intact, a zombie won't stop. Cut off the arms, it will still walk. Cut of the legs, it will use its arms. It has no fear or mechanism for stopping other than death. Again, regarding the mechanisms for zombie's sustenance, well, I agree it comes down to a "worlds" scenario, although I'd imagine if it was so simple to outlast a zombie, most zombie outbreaks would be over in 3 months. But most stories don't paint that picture.

7) 88 gun per person in the US. Ammo and guns wont' be that hard to get. Add to that as the threate grew, mass production would ramp up. Possible even free distribution of .22 and ammo.

True, but most people probably don't own even one in good working condition, and keep probably well below 100 rounds in stock. Ammo would be hoarded or bartered for probably X-times gold. Free distribution of ammo and arming a populace, is something law enforcement and government would never want to endorse, especially in urban areas. Maybe in rural, but that's unlikely to have the same problems as a city seething with zombies.

8) In Romeros' world, cremation would become the MO for disposal. Don't forget his 'solution' came about after the first movies. IT's an after thought. However, his zombie are animated humans, other then that nothing special. SO there base needs remain. Eating for energy, Oxygen to the brain. All of which mean a working heart. So it would very much be a wait and see. People would rise, then die again in a few weeks.

In Romero's world, cremation is ideal, but Dawn and Land show it's not exactly being followed. Worse, you'd have various religious burial beliefs interfering with proper disposal of bodies in some cases. Romero's zombies last for decades, and in a fairly robust state, and come from any state of death (assuming the brain's not destroyed), so to say they're nothing special, is perhaps a bit of an understatement..

Eh, I don't take zombie apocalypses with any serious grain, but here's some flaws in these arguments:

1) Too Many Natural Predators, including insects that would render rotting flesh useless pretty quickly.
This assumes eating the flesh of the infected wouldn't cause a blight on the consumer. Also, zombies who congregate in herds would be more than a vicious match for most 4-legged predators.

2) Zombies don't like hot weather: dead bodies bloat within weeks due to stomach gases and start exploding, and in extreme heat they would shrivel like raisins.
This assumes a lot about the physiology of an undead corpse is the same as a dead corpse. I can think of at least one reason why it isn't.

3) Zombies don't like cold weather: frozen meat becomes rigid
Fair enough, but what about summer months, and global warming and thawing? If you don't have a sustainable food source and heat in a cold climate, you'll be pushed south where there's plenty of zombies looking for a fresh food source.

4) Biting isn't a good way to spread disease...
Let's not forget, not all zombie outbreaks are caused by disease. In Romero's films, you die for any reason and come back as the undead (assuming the brain isn't destroyed).

5) Zombies can't heal: every time a zombie fell or was injured they break bones and lose body parts without anyone there to patch them back up, and the human body is pretty weak, many household items could be used to easily kill a zombie like a shovel, bat, hammer, sledgehammer, 2x4, chainsaw, etc. If someone broke in your house to kill you right now what would you use to kill them with? Whatever comes to mind are your zombie weapons.
True, but zombies don't have most of the same kill points or have the fear or instincts a living assailant would have. Essentially you have a killing machine with a single-minded goal and a limited and semi-armored kill point. Close-Quarters combat is always gamble with one, as their teeth pretty much just have to scratch you and you're screwed. A bat, shovel, 2x4, isn't the best option against multiple zombies if you're going for a kill. A hammer is a extremely dangerous if you're not getting a one hit kill or swinging from behind as it only extends your reach by a foot or so. Most people would have trouble wielding a sledgehammer without some practice and even then, it's a gamble. Chainsaw is a great way to get infected blood all over you and immobilize you while you try to hack through a bone or even a weak point like a neck (and it's super loud). And hacking off the limb of a zombie isn't going to phase them a bit.

6) Zombie-Proof Barriers (and zombies don't use tools)
Zombies do have limited use of bludgeons, and some cases, fire arms, see Romero's Land of the Dead and others.

7) We have a lot of guns: there are almost 15 million hunting licenses in the US [nssf.org] and that doesn't count people with guns that don't need a hunting license like handguns or the military and the police. There are 300 million people in the US [google.com] so even if the entire US was zombies except for the 15 million with hunting licenses each person would only need to kill 20 zombies. That doesn't sound too difficult.
Unless you have a well-stocked personal arsenal and armory (and I'm sure some people do, but not most), you'll run out of ammo eventually, or at least be limited to what you can carry, when scavenging, and in that case, you'll have to deal with other armed humans, where all bets are off. Also, gunshots can be more dangerous than a single zombie as it's like sending up a flare to your location, to all the other zombies.

8) Zombies feed and reproduce with world's #1 predator: Imagine if every time you wanted to eat something or have sex you had to first kill someone but everyone knew you were coming? How long do you think you would last? Probably not very long, someone would kill you off or you would starve to death quickly, but that's the life of a zombie.
Eh, again, this assumes zombies breed purely from a viral outbreak, and not something more endemic arising from a state of death. In that scenario, everyone is a zombie once they die, and sentimentality always gets someone eaten. But nowadays, zombies are always some kind of viral outbreak, which makes them a more resolvable target. Credit Romero once again for painting the bleaker and more hopeless landscape, and the best Zombie films (Night, Dawn, Day, Land).

Man, am I bored at work...

Where's Boltie when you need her? No butts!

...because made it a little harder for Grandma Silvia and Warehouse Joe to get contact viruses while scrubbing around in an outmoded IE 6.

Or as most people over 40 call it, the Blue "E".

You bring up an interesting point. Is anyone technically, legally granted permission to redistribute music to a cloud service, in the strictest legal terms?

I'm guessing not if the RIAA had anything to say, they'd probably want you to have to pay for the same thing all over again, like records, cassettes, CD's, digital, left ear, right ear.

Hmm, now this is getting interesting, I wish I knew a good lawyer.

Ah, civil case. Good point.

I posted a similar comment in thread from yesterday, but I'll ask here again, hoping someone will see it.

Basically, is the statute of limitations applicable to downloaded music? In my limited legal knowledge, it's not a felony to download music, afik, so misdemeanors typically fall under a 7-year statute of limitation, and so if you downloaded stuff from Napster's heyday, more than 10 years ago, could those mp3s even be used to legally prosecute you?

Of course I know we're talking about the RIAA here, and they act as if the law doesn't apply to them in their dealing. But I'm curious.