"The approach makes sense. Lethal Protector reinvented the long-tongued symbiote for the '90s. It kicked off with a truce between Eddie Brock and Spider-Man, and saw Brock move to San Francisco. There, he began a career as an antihero rather than as a villain. Needless to say, trouble followed hot on Brock's heels, as the miniseries saw Venom hunted down by the Life Foundation. They sought to tap into the power of Brock's symbiote, and created five new symbiote spawn. We can assume the film will adapt this plot twist to introduce Carnage, rumored to be the main bad guy. He's one of Marvel's most brutal villains, created when a symbiote bonded with a psychopathic murderer. It's believed Riz Ahmed is playing Carnage's host, Cletus Kasady."

https://screenrant.com/venom-movie-lethal-protector-comics/

This is not the Spider Man Arc. This is the Lethal Protector Arc.
They even had a complete action figure line of the main 5 symbiotes in the early 90s.

"Venom is loosely adapting the Lethal Protector comic arc, which saw Eddie Brock and Venom going up against the sinister Life Foundation and their hideous experimentations. The results of that were the Five Symbiotes: Riot, Scream, Agony, Lasher and Phage. Developed from "seeds" collected from the parent Venom symbiote, each had their own distinct powers"

https://screenrant.com/venom-movie-villains-symbiotes/

Canon? Are you not familiar with the fuckery of Hollywood? This has nothing to do with Spiderman* - notice Venom doesnt even have the white spider on his chest?

Also Tom Hardy is a terrible choice. His "accent" actually made me cringe.

* Of course in the Ultimate universe the Venom symbiote isnt an alien but is instead a "cure for cancer" created by Eddie Brock Sr and Richard Parker (Peter's father). I take it they're probably going a similar route.

You've bought the bullshit.
We are not the only omnivore. Many animals that can survive without meat eat it. They have a choice, they choose meat. All dogs for instance.
You make the mistake of assuming all meat was 'harmed' because it didn't die a natural death. Simply not true.
Yes, it can be wrong to violently kill animals for entertainment, but not wrong to humanely kill them for sustenance.
Sure we fornicate in public. You've never been to Key West, obviously.
Do we kill our newborn children, no, we advanced enough to 'kill' them before they're born so they are never children, but before abortion, yes, humans absolutely killed their newborn children. In ancient Greece, a child wasn't considered a human until it was a year old, and killing it for any reason in that time was perfectly acceptable. In many cultures, if a child is deformed, it's killed, even today. You're just plain wrong.
A LARGE percentage of animals eat meat, not a small one.
Again, you make a mistaken ASSUMPTION that I (and everyone else) eat factory meat, because otherwise your argument falls flat.

What say you about the Masai, who have nothing to eat besides their cattle and live a symbiotic life with them?

El Nino causes coral bleeching? That's when the symbiotic algae that gives the coral its color dies off. In the long run, those reefs bleeching out will die off and that will cause more long term problems in those oceans. Fuuucking BABY JESUS!

Bernie said that climate change will limit resources like water and turn fertile soil to dust causing more struggle for what's left, which leads to more terrorism. Think Mad Max. He's right.

And no I don't mean social arts, I mean humans use social behavior to survive, and when civilization began around 10k years ago it allowed for proper division of labor, everyone pitches in and everyone reaps the rewards, symbiotic. Not a scary thing.

And when I said ignorant, I didn't mean it as an empty insult, only that anyone afraid of socialism is ignoring the facts.

There are a lot of companies out there who could learn from this.
Many more that turn a way better profit than a company like WestJet.

I'm looking at some of the Large Retail Department stores - You know who you are!!

Random giving back to communities is the best way to win their hearts. We are all connected, Companies today need to realize that business isn't all about take take take. It is a symbiotic relationship. They can't survive without communities and consumers, while we can't live without their good and services. It's a nice feeling when a company takes some of their profits and puts it back into the sysem in a way that is pure giving.

*promote the master!
welcome back @blankfist
ya'all need to start taking notes.

this guy was super entertaining,i thought he was gonna have an embolism at the halfway mark.

hiiiiilarious!!!

look,no matter which direction you approach this situation the REAL dynamic is simply:power vs powerlessness.

we also should establish which form of libertarianism we are speaking.cultofdusty criticizes the bastardized american version and this dude come from a more classic libertarian (sans the unbridled capitalism).so there should be no surprise they are at odds in their opinion.this man is defending a libertarianism that cultofdusty may not even be aware of at all.

libertarianism has little or nothing in common with the republican party.

so when this dude posits that the corporation is the fault of government,while not entirely accurate,it is also not entirely wrong.corporations in the distant past were temporary alliances of companies,with the blessing of the people (government) to achieve a specific job or project and once that project was complete,the corporation was dissolved.

it was a cadre of clever lawyers,representing powerful interests who convinced the supreme court that corporations were people and hence began the long road leading us to where we are now.

so it was partly the government that fascillitated the birth of the corporation.

i do take issue with this mans assessment of public education.his commentary is the height of ignorance.while i would agree that what we have now can hardly be called 'education".his blanket and broad statements in regards to public education TOTALLY ignores the incredible benefits that come from an educated public.he ignores the history of public education,as if this system has been unchanging for 100 years.

that is just flat out...stupid..or more likely just lazy,regurgitating the maniacal rants of his heroes without ever once giving that 100 years some critical study.

so let me point to the the late 50's and 60's here in the USA where our public education was bar-none the best in the world.what were the consequences of this stellar public education?
well,...civil rights marches,anti-war movement,womens rights movement and a whole generation that not only questioned authority and the entrenched power structures but openly DEFIED those structures.

this absolutely petrified the powered elite.
during the height of the anti-war movement nixon was forced to baricade the white house with school buses and was quoted as saying to kissinger " henry,they are coming for me".

again,the fundamental premise is,and has always been -power vs powerlessness.

so over the nest few decades public education was manipulated and transformed into a subtle indoctrination to teach young minds to tacitly submit to authority.

which this man addresses and i agree,i just disagree with his overly generalized non-historically accurate puke-vomit.

my final point,and its always the point where libertarians lose their shit on me like an offended westboro baptist acolyte (its actually two points) is this:
1.if we can blame the government for much of the problems in regards to concentrated power and the abuse that goes with that power,then we MUST also address the abusive (and corrosive) power of the corporation.many libertarians i discuss with seem to be under the impression that if we take away the symbiotic relationship between corporations and government that somehow..miraculously..the corporation will all of a sudden become the benign and productive member of society.

this is utter fiction.
this is magical thinking.
many corporations have a larger GDP than many nation states.this is about POWER and there is ZERO evidence any corporation will be willing to relinquish that power just because there is no government to influence,manipulate or corrupt.

which brings me to point number 2:
my libertarian friends.
you live in a thing called a society.
a community where other people also live.
so please stop with this rabid individualism as somehow being the pinnacle of human endeavour.im all for personal responsibility but nobody lives in a vacuum and nobody rides this train alone.the world does not revolve around YOU.

but i do understand,and agree,that the heart of the libertarian argument is more power to the people.i also understand their arguments against governments,which directly and oftimes indirectly disempowers people.

i get that.its a good argument..
BUT...for fucks sake please admit that the corporation in its current state has GOT TO FUCKING GO!

because if you dont then ultimately you are trading one tyrant for another and in my humble opinion,ill stick with the one i can at least vote on or protest.

there aint nothing democratic about a multi-national corporation.they are,by design,dictatorships.

so i will agree to wittle the government down and restrict its powers to defense (NOT war),law and fraud police,if you agree to dismantle and restructure the seven headed leviathan that is todays corporation.

deal?

The funny thing is this seems fantastical, but symbiotic relationships like this (and are maybe more amazing than this) exist all over the world. Well, they exist now. They'll probably be destroyed in the next few decades.

Comment hidden because you are ignoring dag. (show it anyway)

Lyrics per @ant's request.

Is there Anybody going to listen to my story - all about the girl who came to stay?

When I say a girl I really mean a girl and cat, they're connected symbiotically.

Ah Pumkin ....
And Storm ...

Well I've never seen the top 15 filled by one user- till that day that Pumkin came along.

Or maybe Storm posts at night while Pumkin's snoozing. Either way their methods can't be wrong

Ah Pumkin ....
And Storm ...

Leaving MintBBBehind and Zifnab in her dust she's moving up

Ant is feeling quite perplexed
His ant hill's getting dwarfed you bet

She's moving moving moving

Ah Pumkin ....
And Storm

It's as *dead as the symbiotic life form on Boris' head.

It's an interesting conversation, one I wish we could all have in person as typing is so cumbersome at times.

It's not only about the testosterone which guides the male libido (The penis has nothing to do with it - unless the entire process actually leads to sex - which it can - but most often it doesn't)

It IS, as Enoch points out, about attention. As long as the process of flashing the colourful feathers, gets the attention that is needed, then the individual is validated.

Just a glance or a stare can be enough to bolster a girls confidence (from a male, a female, a family member, a boss or whoever.) And if wearing the right shoes does the trick the validation is achieved. If wearing designer labels works, then validation is achieved. If being seen in a Lamborghini does the trick, then validation is achieved. Everyone has triggers. Sometimes they are emotional triggers brought on by personal trauma - sometimes they are learned triggers brought on by advertizing and society.

Male or female, Validation is all anyone ever wants. Those that have had constant validation in their lives, may not be a slave to the process. But in a society where advertisers constantly try to make us feel like we are not good enough so that they can create a market based on everyone's self image this is the way things work.

If it didn't work so well, they wouldn't do it. I work in advertising. I have been trained to find a way to sell things to people that they don't need. The problem is, I'm a cynic and I can't do it. So every time I have to do it, I find a way around it. That's why I now work at a college (a microcosm of political correctness where I don't have to sell stuff using sex - in fact we go out of our way not to)

So there are two sides to this equation:
1). There is the side where everyone seeks validation either emotionally, physically or by accomplishment.
2). And there is the side where advertising exploits our biological AND emotional needs to sell stuff.

Although they are two very different things, they form a symbiotic relationship and feed off each other.

I know that @bareboards2, you are trying to say, that this "advertising" needs to stop. And ideally, you are right. If you find a way to stop it all let us know. But I also know that this type of marketing is so targeted to our needs at the most basic levels, that this type of thing will never go away. Our personal needs, and desires need it too badly.

To try to explain all this is difficult - I trained for 6-years in art school to manipulate what people see and how to make them see what I want them to see. How to lead them and bring them to my way of thinking through visual media. Advertising is an attack and a science into your needs, sensibilities, emotions and psychological image of your self.

I expect the only way to battle media is through media - The person with the most media and money wins. (it's a propaganda war)

If you want to delve deeper into the psychology of it all - It's an in-depth study - here is a place to start. Start with John Berger's, "Ways of Seeing".
http://videosift.com/video/John-Berger-Art-Critic-interview
http://videosift.com/video/Ways-of-seeing-John-Berger (first episode of four)
http://videosift.com/video/WAYS-OF-SEEING-final-episode-vertising (final episode - Advertising).
The book starts with classical art and leads right up into modern advertising. Check Amazon for reviews.

OK,

So I don't promote or tolerate these kind of tantrums -at all.
But that being said. I really feel bad for this kid.

It seems kids are beginning with computers from the time they learn to click the mouse. It's what they know as a constant reality in their world. They are are being raised on it - it's like air. Their brains are being programed to exist almost symbiotically with the computer. When they are left unchecked, separating them can be mentally traumatic for them.

This kid is fairly young. It's almost like it's an animal response. It's up to parents to keep this type of tool from kids and monitor it's use. It's harder than it looks. I know If I separated my child from his computer, he wouldn't act like this, but I interact with him and we set limits on a regular basis. Now if I flat, went in and deleted his user ID and everything he had, ya, he'd be undeniably upset. Wouldn't you?

Only you and I have relationships outside of the computer world (I hope) so we all have something to fall back on partly because some of us remember not having the computer to start with.

Again, I don't condone the reaction, but I do understand it and I can't help blaming the world around us for the situation we are in. Computer games and websites are, in their design, addictive, they are meant to be, that's how they are designed. That's how they make their money.

It's not the child's responsibility to separate and educate himself against the onslaught of techno. His parents, his family, teachers and friends should get in on the solution.Us parents are a huge part of the problem. Kids don't even go outside to play anymore unless the parents set up a "Play Date" or a "Hang Out". Remember when we used to go outside and just knock on a door and say can Johny come out and play?" That doesn't happen any more. Kids just sit there on the computer waiting for the parents to initiate play time.


OK, I'll end now, but you see my point right...??

Reality check!

From Wikipedia: "...the fur hosts two species of symbiotic cyanobacteria, which provide camouflage.[3][4] Because of the cyanobacteria, sloth fur is a small ecosystem of its own, hosting many species of non-parasitic insects..."

Thje coolest Planets I've ever experienced in Sci-fi are the four worlds from the "The Four Lords of the Diamond" A series of four science fiction novels by author Jack L. Chalker.

"The Warden Diamond is a system of four planets, each very different from the other, ruled by their own lords, collectively called “The Four Lords of the Diamond.” Each planet of the Diamond has its own special “Warden Organism,” a symbiotic microorganism that lives within the inhabitants of the planets. However, the organisms destroy their host when he or she leaves the Warden Diamond, making the planet system the ideal prison colony for the Confederacy, a massive space empire."

The series features four books, each centering on one of the four planets of:
"Lilith: A Snake in the Grass" (Del Rey 1981, ISBN 0-345-29369-X)
"Cerberus: A Wolf in the Fold" (Del Rey 1981, ISBN 0-345-31122-1)
"Charon: A Dragon at the Gate" (Del Rey 1982, ISBN 0-345-29370-3)
"Medusa: A Tiger by the Tail" (Del Rey 1983, ISBN 0-345-29372-X)


These books have repeatedly been in and out of press. I've bought them several times, then lent them out. Some of the most complex and thought out worlds I've experienced in sci-fi reading. Unfortunately, no movies were ever make. However unlikely, I am forever hopeful. ;:)

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Four_Lords_of_the_Diamond