Blackmoor Vituperative

I spent some time today piecing together the cinematic history of Godzilla. I have about a dozen Godzilla movies on DVD and Blu-Ray. Most are available in English. A few are not. Some were brutally mangled for US release, but I think many of those have since been re-released by distributors that actually care about the film (most notably Gojira and Godzilla Raids Again).

With that in mind, I have compiled a list of the Godzilla films and what I consider to be the important Godzilla-related films (I included Rodan, for example, but I did not include movies like War of the Gargantuas, which are ostensibly set in the same universe but which never cross over with Godzilla), and linked them to what I consider the best versions of those films on DVD or Blu-Ray. Unfortunately, some are very difficult to find at a sane price (or unavailable entirely, in the case of Return of Godzilla).

I hope that other people find this list useful.

Showa era

• Godzilla (1954)
• Godzilla Raids Again (1955)
• Rodan (1956)
• Mothra (1961)
• King Kong vs. Godzilla (1962)
• Mothra vs. Godzilla (1964)
• Ghidorah, the Three-Headed Monster (1964)
• Invasion of Astro-Monster (1965)
• Godzilla vs. the Sea Monster (1966)
• King Kong Escapes (1967)
• Son of Godzilla (1967) This is currently quite hard to find at a sane price. I do not know why anyone would pay more than $20 for this.
• Destroy All Monsters (1968)
• All Monsters Attack (1969) aka “Godzilla’s Revenge”.
• Godzilla vs. Hedorah (1971) I suggest that you watch this in Japanese with English subtitles.
• Godzilla vs. Gigan (1972)
• Godzilla vs. Megalon (1973)
• Godzilla vs. Mechagodzilla (1974) This is another one that is difficult to find for a sane price.
• Terror of Mechagodzilla (1975)

Heisei era

• The Return of Godzilla (1984) Unfortunately, there is no English version of this film on DVD. That may be a blessing: the Americanized version of this film (“Godzilla 1985”) was an abomination. You may be able to find a region-free copy of the Japanese film on Ebay, though.
• Godzilla vs. Biollante (1989)
• Godzilla vs. King Ghidorah (1991) This is a huge improvement over the DVD release: widescreen, with both the Japanese and English audio tracks.
• Godzilla vs. Mothra (1992) This is a huge improvement over the DVD release: widescreen, with both the Japanese and English audio tracks.
• Godzilla vs. Mechagodzilla II (1993)
• Godzilla vs. SpaceGodzilla (1994)
• Godzilla vs. Destoroyah (1995)
• Rebirth of Mothra (1996)
• Rebirth of Mothra II (1997)
• Rebirth of Mothra III (1998)

The American knock-off

• Godzilla (1998) No, it isn’t really a Godzilla movie, but Zilla does show up in Final Wars.

Millennium era

• Godzilla 2000 (1999)
• Godzilla vs. Megaguirus (2000)
• Godzilla, Mothra and King Ghidorah: Giant Monsters All-Out Attack (2001)
• Godzilla Against Mechagodzilla (2002)
• Godzilla: Tokyo S.O.S. (2003)
• Godzilla: Final Wars (2004)

“Fat Godzilla” era

• Godzilla (2014)

Many cryptographers and other security experts are familiar with what has come to be known as Kerckhoffs’ Principle. Many, however, do not know that there are actually six such principles. The core ideas of these principles are still relevant today, more than 125 years after he first articulated them.

1. The system should be, if not theoretically unbreakable, unbreakable in practice.
2. The design of a system should not require secrecy and compromise of the system should not inconvenience the correspondents (Kerckhoffs’ principle).
3. The key should be memorable without notes and should be easily changeable.
4. The cryptograms should be transmittable by telegraph.
5. The apparatus or documents should be portable and operable by a single person.
6. The system should be easy, neither requiring knowledge of a long list of rules nor involving mental strain.

(from Six principles of practical ciphers, TechRepublic)

The Rocky Mountain city instructs all job applicants to divulge their usernames and passwords for “any Internet-based chat rooms, social clubs or forums, to include, but not limited to: Facebook, Google, Yahoo, YouTube.com, MySpace, etc.” Bozeman city officials say that this is just a component of a thorough background check.
(from City wants job applicants to turn over Facebook user names and passwords, TechRepublic)

We really should not be surprised. Where was the outrage when employers started demanding potential employees — not even employees, merely applicants — consent to the humiliating and offensive invasion of privacy called “drug testing”? Where was the indignation, and the universal refusal to comply?

Where were the libertarian groups, the civil rights groups, the lawmakers and lobbyists who pretend to defend the rights of citizens against the abuse of those in power?

Nowhere. I and a handful of other people refused to submit to such debasement, but the rest of you sheep went along with it, and now good luck finding an employer who doesn’t demand it.

You sheep made this bed. Get ready to lay in it.

The Digital Rights Mafia (RIAA and their ilk) won a major court victory yesterday: the jury awarded the plaintiffs $1,920,000.00, or $80,000.00 per song. $80,000 per song.

One more time: $80,000 PER SONG.

A jury did this. What the hell is wrong with people? What the hell is wrong with our justice system? When will our elected representatives stop twisting our legal system into pretzels for the benefit of the Digital Rights Mafia and the media robber barons?

One thing is certain: juries need to be better educated.

Forrester Research has come out with a report stating, among other things, that half to two-thirds of businesses have “concerns” about open source security.

The problem with empty headlines like “Companies still concerned about open source security” is that they tell you nothing and yet imply everything. You may as well say, “Study Reveals Pittsburgh Unprepared For Full-Scale Zombie Attack“. What does this headline tell you? Is any city prepared for a full scale zombie attack? Is a full-scale zombie attack even remotely likely?

The answer to both is “no”. Yet the headline implies that the answer to both questions is “yes”.

Should companies be concerned about the security of open source software? Of course they should — and they should also be concerned about closed source software, as well as the firmware in their hardware, their physical security, and the safety of their employees in the parking lot.

Should companies avoid open source software for “security” reasons? Of course not. Open source software is, in general, more secure than closed source software, and security flaws in open source software are more quickly corrected when they are found.

The problem with polls like Forrester’s (and those who conduct them) is not that the results are inaccurate (although they may be). The problem is that you won’t get the correct answer if you do not ask the correct question — and you have to understand the topic in order to ask the right questions. Forrester Research clearly doesn’t.

Ars Technica has a review of the book Appetite for Self-Destruction: The Spectacular Crash of the Record Industry in the Digital Age. I will have to pick this up.

By the way, don’t feel bad for record companies. They have been screwing artists for years. It was only a matter of time before something brought an end to the perverse market conditions that allowed the big record companies to survive.

The recording industry has spent (and continues to spend) millions of dollars on its litigation campaign against accused file-swappers, but if two lawyers have their way, the RIAA will have to pay all the money back. Not content simply to defend Jammie Thomas-Rasset in her high-profile retrial next week in Minnesota, lawyer Kiwi Camara is joining forces with Harvard Law professor Charles Nesson to file a class-action lawsuit against the recording industry later this summer.

The goal is nothing less than to force the industry to pay back the alleged “$100+ million” it has collected over the last few years. Perhaps the RIAA had good reason not to send those settlement letters to Harvard for so long.

(from Lawyers plan class-action to reclaim “$100M+” RIAA “stole”, ArsTechnica)

Give ’em hell, guys. It’s about time someone seriously took on the Digital Rights Mafia.

Google says that there are at least 18 Android devices on the way. Let’s hope that at least one of these has:

1. Everything the T-Mobile G1 has, including a physical keyboard,
2. a 4.5″ (measured diagonally) screen (but the same aspect ratio as the G1),
3. the Bluetooth DUN profile enabled (currently disabled on the G1, to my extreme annoyance).

Crossing my fingers…

It is not possible to prevent every possible security breach. However, some common sense measures will make such a breach significantly less likely to occur.

In a surprise move this year, Microsoft has decided to quietly install what amounts to a massive security vulnerability in Firefox without informing the user. […]

Microsoft pushed out its .NET Framework 3.5 Service Pack 1 update this February […] it installs the Microsoft .NET Framework Assistant extension for Firefox, silently, without informing the user. If you had Firefox on your computer when this update was installed, you may be subject to some dire consequences. […]

Yes, that’s right — the long-time, well known security hole present in Internet Explorer that consists of essentially letting Websites install dangerous, untrusted code on your computer willy-nilly has now been shoehorned into your MS Windows install of Firefox without your knowledge or permission.

Worse yet, Microsoft isn’t satisfied with just giving you vulnerabilities without your permission or even your knowledge. It has also gone out of its way to ensure that you’ll have a difficult time removing the vulnerability from your system if you should happen to become aware of it. The Uninstall button for this extension in Firefox has been deactivated.

(from Microsoft may be Firefox’s worst vulnerability, TechRepublic)

To find out how to remove this security vulnerability, see Uninstalling the Clickonce Support for Firefox.