Blogroll

I read blogs, as well as write one. The 'blogroll' on this site reproduces some posts from some of the people I enjoy reading.

Disclaimer: Reproducing an article here need not necessarily imply agreement or endorsement!

Imunify360 2.4-12 released

CloudLinux - 3 hours 10 min ago

We are pleased to announce that the new updated beta Imunify360 version 2.4-12 is now available. This latest version embodies further improvements of the product as well as new features. Imunify360 also has become more reliable and stable due to the bug fixes described below.

Should you encounter any problems with product or have any questions, comments or suggestions, please contact our support team at  cloudlinux.zendesk.com: Imunify360 department. We’d be more than happy to help you.

Changelog:

Imunify360 2.4-12

  • DEF-2309: import CSF blocked ports into imunify360;
  • DEF-2574: ON DELETE CASCADE for hit_extras table;
  • DEF-1893: fixed trace for "imunify360-agent clean --days" with too large int;
  • DEF-2530: web scans work correctly in Plesk env;
  • DEF-2542: fixed "following configuration is already active" check for locale is not "en";
  • DEF-2156: added mail directory to inotify scanner;
  • DEF-2434: added ability to switch "Full access" for existing whitelisted IPs;
  • DEF-2489: fixed bug with full_access and move to blacklist;
  • DEF-2494: added opting out of Sentry.io Reporting;
  • DEF-2497:Added support of "--full-access" keyword to "move" & "edit" commands;
  • DEF-2540: added /tmp/.vdserver to csf.ignore;
  • DEF-2550: fixed KeyError('method',) in malformed {'msg': 'server suspended: empty server id', 'success': 'false'}

To instal new beta Imunify360 version 2.4-12 please follow the instructions inthe documentation.

The upgrading is available since 2.0-19 version.

To upgrade Imunify360 run the command:

yum update imunify360-firewall --enablerepo=imunify360-testing

More information on Imunify360 can be found here.

Categories: Technology

We fear Sir Michael Marmot is confused here but it's a good plan anyway

Adam Smith Institute - 4 hours 23 min ago

Sir Michael Marmot is famed as the academic who told us all that health inequality is caused by economic inequality. we don't doubt that this is partially true although we'd really like to insist that health inequality will produce economic as well. Becoming bedridden and incapable to work at age 40 will lead to income inequality at age 60.

His latest work tells us that life expectancy is rising more slowly in the aftermath of the recession. This could of course be true. We might even agree with Owen Jones here:

An ideologically driven programme of cuts is almost certainly robbing us of life. Consistently rising life expectancy should be something we all take for granted. The UK, after all, is one of the wealthiest societies that has ever existed in human history. There are continuing dramatic improvements in medicine and technology. And yet new research by an ex-government adviser, Sir Michael Marmot, suggests that the rise in life expectancy – a constant trend for a hundred years – has stalled since 2010. What happened that year, exactly? Was that not when David Cameron, George Osborne and their Lib Dem stooges began slashing public services with a false economic pretext?

And thus the call for revolution:

Is there any clearer evidence of how utterly bankrupt our social order is? Human and social progress is grinding to a halt in Britain. Life is getting more insecure and poorer for millions – soon, it may even be getting shorter. That’s why we don’t just need a change in government in Britain, we need a change in how we organise our society. A peaceful, democratic revolution is long overdue in Britain, for the sake of our living standards, our health – and for the sake of our very lives.

Well, OK. So, what exactly should the revolution consist of? As Marmot points to:

There is no reason why the UK could not emulate Hong Kong, where life expectancy for men is 81.1 years for men and 87.3 for women – the highest in the world – Marmot added. Hong Kong has overtaken Japan in terms of how long citizens can expect to live.

So, let's increase economic inequality up to Hong Kong levels then, cut social spending down to Hong Kong levels and slash government overall to Hong Kong levels. We're just fine with that but we do think that Professor Marmot, given his usual proclivities, is confused here. And no one at all is surprised that Young Owen is confused at all, are they?

Categories: Current Affairs

Does Britain Have the World’s Best Health System? Only If You Ignore Outcomes

Mises Institute - 7 hours 24 min ago
By: George Pickering
nhs2.PNG

“The National Health Service is the closest thing the English have to a religion,” Margaret Thatcher’s Chancellor Nigel Lawson famously once observed. However, given the swivel-eyed fanaticism with which its supporters will defend it, even from the overwhelming evidence of its shortcomings, at this point it might be more accurate to describe the NHS as Britain’s national cult.

The utterly unparalleled degree of moral outrage which greets any criticism of the NHS bespeaks the decades of propaganda — in the state’s schools, from the state’s politicians, and on the state’s news and media outlets — which have taught the British people to believe that the only alternative to a state-controlled healthcare monopoly is for the poor to die in the streets. So pervasive has this myth become that the Labour party has been able to base its entire electoral strategy, for decades, on painting themselves as the only party that truly cares about ‘our NHS’, and a recent survey found that, when asked ‘What makes you proud to be British’, the NHS was the nation’s most common answer by a considerable margin. All this has led to a situation wherein the desperately needed reforms to Britain’s healthcare system cannot even be discussed, due to the irrational overflowing of blind rage and uncomprehending contempt that greets any criticism of Britain’s ultimate sacred cow.

This baseless self-satisfaction and refusal to consider change is in no way helped by studies such as one which has recently made headlines across the British press, which placed the NHS as “the number one health system”. The study in question ranked the healthcare systems of 11 countries, and found that Britain’s NHS fulfilled the study’s criteria of success most adequately, followed by Australia and the Netherlands, with Canada, France, and the United States languishing at the bottom of its rankings. This positive result might come as a surprise even to those who usually accept the mainstream narrative surrounding the NHS. Indeed, even at the bottom of the BBC’s own triumphalist article on the study in question, they link to related stories with headlines such as “NHS rationing leaves patients in pain”, and “Long waits for surgery have tripled in four years”!

These two headlines hint at the perennial problem of shortages due to price controls which must inevitably exist in a system such as the NHS. For as long as the price of healthcare services is held artificially low (or free) by state intervention, individual consumers will no longer have an incentive to economise and question whether they really need a given service, or whether those scarce resources should go to others in more desperate need. This inevitably leads to a greater number of people clamouring to extract services than the supply can handle, leading to the shortages, long waiting times, and rationing which have characterised the piteous state of NHS services throughout its history. So immutable is the economic law that price controls lead to shortages that, in the words of Ludwig von Mises, “even capital punishment could not make price control work, in the days of Emperor Diocletian and the French Revolution.” The fact that public support for the NHS remains so high, despite these major problems inherent in the nature of the system itself, provides a stark real-life example of the dangers of choosing to ignore the insights of economics.

Unfortunately however, price controls and shortages are far from the only problems which stem from Britain’s state monopoly of healthcare. As Kristian Niemietz of the Institute of Economic Affairs highlighted in an excellent recent article, the characteristics of the NHS which Britons mistakenly believe to be a unique source of pride, are actually present in almost every other healthcare system in the developed world; yet these other systems lack the NHS’s hostility to innovation in medicines and practices. Furthermore, the high number of avoidable infant deaths in some of its trusts led to the NHS being brought under government investigation in April for standards of maternal care which regulators described as “truly shocking”. I eagerly await the fundamental reforms that will surely result from the state regulators’ suggestion of a state investigation into the wrongdoings of the state’s own healthcare system.

How is it possible, then, that the NHS should have ranked so highly in this recent study by the influential Commonwealth Fund health think tank, despite all these major problems? The answer is in the study’s careful selection of the criteria used as metrics of success, in order to give the most weight to the few areas in which the NHS actually does succeed. Indeed, the study stands out considerably from all other healthcare system comparisons by the great weight it places on procedure and general system characteristics, with relatively little weight given to the actual outcomes. One might think that the NHS’s place in the bottom 20% for both cancer survival rates and medically avoidable death rates would be seen as a statistic too important to be swept under the rug by the technicalities of this study’s method. The Commonwealth Fund also gives surprisingly little weight to the NHS’s dismally low efficiency in terms of healthcare bang per buck, a fact which undermines those who claim that simply throwing more taxpayers’ money at the system would solve its problems.

In terms of its health outcomes across most common ailments, Britain’s NHS ranks closer to former communist bloc countries like Slovenia than to its Western European neighbours. Even a country like Spain, whose GDP per capita is fully 25% lower than Britain’s, has healthcare outcomes so much higher than those of the NHS that, if the British system were able to improve even to the point that it was merely equal with Spain, 10,000 fewer Britons would die of medically preventable causes every single year. Even the Commonwealth Fund study in question concedes that, while they ranked the NHS as the number one health system overall, its competence in the small matter of actually keeping its patients alive was the second-worst of any country under consideration.

The boundaries of socially acceptable debate still have a considerable distance to shift in Britain before the desperate need for fundamental NHS reform can be calmly acknowledged and reasonably discussed. Until such time, no amount of minor tweaking or extra funding will be able to address the rot at the heart of the system, from which so many of its avoidable failures stem: namely its status as a taxpayer-funded state monopoly. Until this fundamental aspect of British healthcare can be criticised without incurring excommunication from public life, the NHS will continue to fail the British people, just as Britain’s state monopolies in coal, shipbuilding, automobiles, and other industries failed in the 1970s.

In the words of the great Chicago economist Thomas Sowell, “You will never understand bureaucracies until you understand that, for bureaucrats, procedure is everything and outcomes are nothing.” Indeed, you can never understand the NHS until you understand that, for as long as British healthcare continues to be run as a government bureaucracy rather than a consumer-facing business, the very lives of British people will continue to be just another ‘outcome’ for the state to ignore.



Categories: Current Affairs

The Many Failures of Britain's National Health Service

Mises Institute - 7 hours 24 min ago
By: George Pickering
nhs2.PNG

“The National Health Service is the closest thing the English have to a religion,” Margaret Thatcher’s Chancellor Nigel Lawson famously once observed. However, given the swivel-eyed fanaticism with which its supporters will defend it, even from the overwhelming evidence of its shortcomings, at this point it might be more accurate to describe the NHS as Britain’s national cult.

The utterly unparalleled degree of moral outrage which greets any criticism of the NHS bespeaks the decades of propaganda — in the state’s schools, from the state’s politicians, and on the state’s news and media outlets — which have taught the British people to believe that the only alternative to a state-controlled healthcare monopoly is for the poor to die in the streets. So pervasive has this myth become that the Labour party has been able to base its entire electoral strategy, for decades, on painting themselves as the only party that truly cares about ‘our NHS’, and a recent survey found that, when asked ‘What makes you proud to be British’, the NHS was the nation’s most common answer by a considerable margin. All this has led to a situation wherein the desperately needed reforms to Britain’s healthcare system cannot even be discussed, due to the irrational overflowing of blind rage and uncomprehending contempt that greets any criticism of Britain’s ultimate sacred cow.

This baseless self-satisfaction and refusal to consider change is in no way helped by studies such as one which has recently made headlines across the British press, which placed the NHS as “the number one health system”. The study in question ranked the healthcare systems of 11 countries, and found that Britain’s NHS fulfilled the study’s criteria of success most adequately, followed by Australia and the Netherlands, with Canada, France, and the United States languishing at the bottom of its rankings. This positive result might come as a surprise even to those who usually accept the mainstream narrative surrounding the NHS. Indeed, even at the bottom of the BBC’s own triumphalist article on the study in question, they link to related stories with headlines such as “NHS rationing leaves patients in pain”, and “Long waits for surgery have tripled in four years”!

These two headlines hint at the perennial problem of shortages due to price controls which must inevitably exist in a system such as the NHS. For as long as the price of healthcare services is held artificially low (or free) by state intervention, individual consumers will no longer have an incentive to economise and question whether they really need a given service, or whether those scarce resources should go to others in more desperate need. This inevitably leads to a greater number of people clamouring to extract services than the supply can handle, leading to the shortages, long waiting times, and rationing which have characterised the piteous state of NHS services throughout its history. So immutable is the economic law that price controls lead to shortages that, in the words of Ludwig von Mises, “even capital punishment could not make price control work, in the days of Emperor Diocletian and the French Revolution.” The fact that public support for the NHS remains so high, despite these major problems inherent in the nature of the system itself, provides a stark real-life example of the dangers of choosing to ignore the insights of economics.

Unfortunately however, price controls and shortages are far from the only problems which stem from Britain’s state monopoly of healthcare. As Kristian Niemietz of the Institute of Economic Affairs highlighted in an excellent recent article, the characteristics of the NHS which Britons mistakenly believe to be a unique source of pride, are actually present in almost every other healthcare system in the developed world; yet these other systems lack the NHS’s hostility to innovation in medicines and practices. Furthermore, the high number of avoidable infant deaths in some of its trusts led to the NHS being brought under government investigation in April for standards of maternal care which regulators described as “truly shocking”. I eagerly await the fundamental reforms that will surely result from the state regulators’ suggestion of a state investigation into the wrongdoings of the state’s own healthcare system.

How is it possible, then, that the NHS should have ranked so highly in this recent study by the influential Commonwealth Fund health think tank, despite all these major problems? The answer is in the study’s careful selection of the criteria used as metrics of success, in order to give the most weight to the few areas in which the NHS actually does succeed. Indeed, the study stands out considerably from all other healthcare system comparisons by the great weight it places on procedure and general system characteristics, with relatively little weight given to the actual outcomes. One might think that the NHS’s place in the bottom 20% for both cancer survival rates and medically avoidable death rates would be seen as a statistic too important to be swept under the rug by the technicalities of this study’s method. The Commonwealth Fund also gives surprisingly little weight to the NHS’s dismally low efficiency in terms of healthcare bang per buck, a fact which undermines those who claim that simply throwing more taxpayers’ money at the system would solve its problems.

In terms of its health outcomes across most common ailments, Britain’s NHS ranks closer to former communist bloc countries like Slovenia than to its Western European neighbours. Even a country like Spain, whose GDP per capita is fully 25% lower than Britain’s, has healthcare outcomes so much higher than those of the NHS that, if the British system were able to improve even to the point that it was merely equal with Spain, 10,000 fewer Britons would die of medically preventable causes every single year. Even the Commonwealth Fund study in question concedes that, while they ranked the NHS as the number one health system overall, its competence in the small matter of actually keeping its patients alive was the second-worst of any country under consideration.

The boundaries of socially acceptable debate still have a considerable distance to shift in Britain before the desperate need for fundamental NHS reform can be calmly acknowledged and reasonably discussed. Until such time, no amount of minor tweaking or extra funding will be able to address the rot at the heart of the system, from which so many of its avoidable failures stem: namely its status as a taxpayer-funded state monopoly. Until this fundamental aspect of British healthcare can be criticised without incurring excommunication from public life, the NHS will continue to fail the British people, just as Britain’s state monopolies in coal, shipbuilding, automobiles, and other industries failed in the 1970s.

In the words of the great Chicago economist Thomas Sowell, “You will never understand bureaucracies until you understand that, for bureaucrats, procedure is everything and outcomes are nothing.” Indeed, you can never understand the NHS until you understand that, for as long as British healthcare continues to be run as a government bureaucracy rather than a consumer-facing business, the very lives of British people will continue to be just another ‘outcome’ for the state to ignore.



Categories: Current Affairs

Re-writing history is the first move towards the repression of Faith

Anglican Ink - 9 hours 37 min ago

Gavin Ashenden reflects on the cultural self-loathing of Britain's elites

Bishop of Chichester defends General Synod votes as tentative, teaching moment

Anglican Ink - 10 hours 10 min ago

Bishop Martin Warner writes to his diocese after the York General Synod

Money Supply Growth Falls Again, Dropping to 105-Month Low

Mises Institute - 11 hours 24 min ago
By: Ryan McMaken
moneysupply.PNG

Growth in the supply of US dollars fell again in May, this time to a 105-month low of 5.4 percent. The last time the money supply grew at a smaller rate was during September 2008 — at a rate of 5.2 percent. 

The money-supply metric used here — an "Austrian money supply" measure — is the metric developed by Murray Rothbard and Joseph Salerno, and is designed to provide a better measure than M2. The Mises Institute now offers regular updates on this metric and its growth.

The "Austrian" measure of the money supply differs from M2 in that it includes treasury deposits at the Fed (and excludes short time deposits, traveler's checks, and retail money funds). 

M2 growth also slowed in May, falling to 5.6 percent, a 20-month low. 

Money supply growth can often be a helpful measure of economic activity. During periods of economic boom, money supply tends to grow quickly as banks make more loans. Recessions, on the other hand, tend to be preceded by periods of falling money-supply growth. 

Thanks to the intervention of central banks, of course, money supply growth in recent decades has never gone into negative territory. 

Nevertheless, as we can see in the graph, significant dips in growth rates show up in years prior to a economic bust or financial crisis. 

For insights into what's affecting money supply growth, we can look at loan activity, such as the Federal Reserve's measure of industrial and commercial loans. 

In this case, we find that the growth rate in loans has fallen to a 74-month low, dropping to 1.9 percent. Loan growth has not been this weak since April of 2011, in the wake of the last financial crisis. 

We find similar trends in real estate loans and in consumer loans, although not to the same extent. 

The current subdued rates of growth in the money supply suggests an economy in which lenders are holding back somewhat on making new loans, which itself suggests a lack of reliable borrowers due to a lackluster overall economy.  This assessment, of course, is reinforced by the Federal Reserve's clear reluctance to wind down it's huge portfolio, and to end its ongoing policy of low-interest rates — concerned that any additional tightening might lead to a recession. 



Categories: Current Affairs

Gray Havens at Wordsmithy

Blog & Mablog - Thu, 20/07/2017 - 22:39
The good folks coordinating Wordsmithy have added The Gray Havens to the lineup. They will be performing a kick-off Wordsmithy concert on Wednesday September 20th, along with teaching a couple of workshops the following day. And of course, we will have our regulars on tap as well. The concert of course is free for Wordsmithy attendees, which now brings me to the point of this particular post. Because of the addition of The Gray Havens to our line up, we are extending early registration to August 1st.  So if you are inclined, please mosey on over and register for Wordsmithy here: And if you want to sample a bit ahead of time,  here is a lyric video to one of their songs from their latest album.

The post Gray Havens at Wordsmithy appeared first on Blog & Mablog.

Categories: People I don't know

You Get the Idea That Reading Is Prized There

Blog & Mablog - Thu, 20/07/2017 - 22:01

If you are interested — and why would you not be? — a link is here.

The post You Get the Idea That Reading Is Prized There appeared first on Blog & Mablog.

Categories: People I don't know

And Now a Brief Word for the Wife Beaters

Blog & Mablog - Thu, 20/07/2017 - 19:54

It would not be exactly accurate to say that I posted my 21 theses on submission in marriage and then skipped town. But there would be some elements of truth in such a hazarded guess nonetheless. I wrote the post last week, and scheduled it to appear Monday morning. But then Sunday after church, Nancy and I bolted for the Oregon coast, where we spent a very pleasant time looking at the sun go down, walking the beach, sitting on the beach, finding a place for lunch . . . all that arduous business.

Upon returning, I axed one comment for being abusive, and spent some time meditating on how to respond to the suggestion that had broken out in my comment thread that I was something of a closet feminist because of my failure to come right out in support of corporal punishment for wives. In the other peanut gallery, a discussion broke out on Facebook over my statement that submission was an erotic necessity, running along the “shades of 50 shades!” line. Maybe I had come out in favor of corporal kinky punishment for wives. Who’s to say? Reading what somebody actually wrote is so tedious.

Let me deal with this second misconception first with an appeal to my mentor on this subject.

“You do not fail in obedience through lack of love, but have lost love through lack of obedience . . . No one has ever told you that obedience—humility—is an erotic necessity” (That Hideous Strength).

Life at Belbury is one extended orgy of biting and devouring. In contrast, life at St. Anne’s is a staggering hierarchy of masculinity and femininity running all the way up, and with a sexual element included where appropriate. There is one horrific scene between Wither and Frost which ends with them in a clinch driven by the lust of mutual animosity, each knowing that at some point a devouring must happen. The corresponding scene is between Ransom and Merlin, and ends with Merlin kneeling, rendering honor like a loyal king’s man. “Slowly, ponderously, yet not awkwardly, as though a mountain sank like a wave, he sank on one knee; and still his face was almost on a level with the Director’s.”[1] No devouring at all.

And the reconciliation between Mark and Jane is profoundly Christian. She has learned the humility of true submission. Her entire life had been driven by the desire not to be taken in, not to be possessed. His had been nothing but the driving lust to be included in the next inner ring, filled to the brim with false promises. Her fundamental submission comes when she surrenders foundationally to Maledil.

“In this height and depth and breadth the little idea of herself which [she] had hitherto called me dropped down and vanished, unfluttering, into bottomless distance, like a bird in a space without air.”[2]

But this is not treated by Lewis as Mark Studdock’s standing permission to continue on as an oaf and a coarse rube, barging into her sexually, but now with impunity because she had become “submissive.” No, his frame of mind has been explicitly transformed.

“This time at last he thought of his own clumsy importunity. And the thought would not go away. Inch by inch, all the lout and clown and clodhopper in him was revealed to his own reluctant inspection; the coarse, male boor with horny hands and hobnailed shoes and beefsteak jaw, not rushing in—for that can be carried off—but blundering, sauntering, stumping in where great lovers, knights and poets, would have feared to tread . . . How had he dared?”[3]

How had he dared? His wife, although a sinner, was a very great lady. He, though a very great sinner, was to return as her lord. But it is not the case that humility is required for a wife to assume her station, but pride will do for the husband. Mark now knew better than that.

“He knew now what he must look like in the eyes of her friends and equals. Seeing that picture, he grew hot to the forehead, alone there in the mist. The word Lady had made no part of his vocabulary save as a pure form or else in mockery.”[4]

There is a parallel passage in Preface to Paradise Lost where Lewis describes the humility of Portia, describing herself as a poor unlettered girl, with some modern male booby walking into Belmont and taking her statement at face value. One’s forehead reddens to think of it, Lewis wrote. It most certainly does.

And so I get a big kick out of moderns—we who do not even know which bathroom to use—learnedly discussing how Lewis was limited by the perspective of his times. Look. Lewis was an old Western man, standing on the other side of a vast chasm that separated him from his times. His erstwhile critics, meantime, have only managed to get about 20 millimeters away from the spirit of their times.

But enough with that kind of foolishness. Let us address another kind.

So now we come to those who say that if a husband doesn’t have the right, nay, sometimes even the responsibility, to exercise corporal punishment on his wife, then one of the tools for ensuring domestic tranquility has been taken away from him. Further, he might argue, anyone who objects to said physical discipline for wives must be one of those newfangled softie men, catechized by all the lies of feminism.

This is the kind of guy who, exasperated by a sluggish app on his smart phone, essays to fix it with a ball-peen hammer.

I am far from denying the biblical truth that a rod is for the back of fools (Prov. 26:3). Nor do I deny that a woman could be numbered among such fools. But such a woman would be far gone in her folly, and the only fool bigger than that would be the guy who married her. So before we beat her for her uppity rebellions, I would suggest we flog him for being such an idiot. If he were to object that this is mean-spirited and unjust, I would reply that it sounds to me that he has been influenced by the spirit of egalitarianism. Must be one of those new softie men.

Since the difficulty was apparently found in my #11, let us discuss that for a moment.

“The Bible does not teach husbands to enforce the requirement that was given to their wives. Since true submission is a matter of the heart, rendered by grace through faith, a husband does not have the capacity to make this happen. His first task is therefore to love his wife as Christ loved the church. He is to lead by example.”

The key words here are enforce and make. No mortal can force such a thing. It does not come from right-handed power. But husbands can love and lead their wives. A husband can love, and Scripture teaches that this kind of love is efficacious. Love bestows loveliness. Husbands cannot duplicate the Lord’s substitutionary atonement, but husbands are most certainly commanded to imitate it. And when they imitate it as they ought, the results are not—work with me here—a beating for the little missus. And a man who thinks it is just demonstrates how far away from the spirit of the gospel he actually is.

The Bible does set before us a hierarchical world, but we are not to conceive of this as a cascade of commandments, flowing ever downward, drowning those at the bottom. Rather, it promotes and elevates those at the bottom. Remember what the gospel does.

But there is an optical illusion here. At some point in every husband/wife relationship, there will be a clash of wills. When that happens, it is often the case that the husband gets owned and he loses. Let us be blunt, and call it what it is. However, we live in flattering times, and he has been given sufficient cover by the church to retreat demurely into his designated background, and to call what he is doing “servant leadership.”

That kind of weakness is not what I am commending. It is not how Christ loved the church. But it is a mistake of the highest order to think that the opposite of this kind of cowardly coyness is to stand on the recliner in one’s man cave beating one’s chest. That is not how He loved the church either.

So authority flows to those who take responsibility. Authority flees those who seek to evade responsibility.

NOTES

[1] C. S. Lewis, That Hideous Strength, EPub Edition, vol. 3, Space Trilogy (HarperCollins e-books, 2012), 271.

[2] C. S. Lewis, Words to Live by: A Guide for the Merely Christian, ed. Paul F. Ford, Adobe Digital Edition (HarperCollins e-books, 2009), 266.

[3] C. S. Lewis, That Hideous Strength, EPub Edition, vol. 3, Space Trilogy (HarperCollins e-books, 2012), 379.

[4] C. S. Lewis, That Hideous Strength, EPub Edition, vol. 3, Space Trilogy (HarperCollins e-books, 2012), 379.

The post And Now a Brief Word for the Wife Beaters appeared first on Blog & Mablog.

Categories: People I don't know

"Hot summer brings new hot features" live webinar on July 25th

CloudLinux - Thu, 20/07/2017 - 18:59

Join Igor Seletskiy, our CEO, for a comprehensive review of all new Imunify360 features. As always, the Q&A session will follow the presentation and gives you the chance to learn more about the AI technology and what's coming next.

Live webinar will take place on Tuesday, July 25th at 12 pm EDT / 9 am PDT. 

Register here.

If you cannot attend, register anyway and we'll send you the recording after the event.

Categories: Technology

EasyApache 4 updated

CloudLinux - Thu, 20/07/2017 - 17:43

The new updated EasyApache 4 packages are available for download from our production repository.

Changelog:

ea-apr-1.5.2-8

  • built against ea-openssl.

ea-openssl-1.0.2k-5

  • moved from experimental to production.

ea-apache24-2.4.25-11

  • added HTTP2 support, disabled HTTP2 building on 32-bit architectures.

ea-apache24-config-1.0-106

  • EA-6159: have fallback errordoc check for existence of .shtml file.

ea-libcurl-7.53.1-3

  • added HTTP2 support.

ea-apache24-mod_bw-0.92-2

  • adjusted installation to ULC/scripts.

ea-apache24-mod_mpm_itk-2.4.7.4-2

  • EA-6232: added conflict for mod_http2.

ea-php-cli-0.2.0-4

  • EA-6333: supports MultiPHP System's non ea- SCL PHPs.

To upgrade run the command:

yum update ea-apr ea-openssl ea-apache24 ea-apache24-config ea-libcurl ea-php-cli ea-apache24-mod_bw
Categories: Technology

The Content Cluster Muster (07.20.17)

Blog & Mablog - Thu, 20/07/2017 - 17:00

Okay, Maybe a Little Time Lapse Going On

Sometimes the open road is more impressive than at other times . . .

What Is Socialism?

There’s Something Rotten in the Church of England

A motion was made at the Church of England’s recent Synod to incorporate a transgender rechristening to their liturgy.

CARL TRUEMAN’S THOUGHTS ON IT

BEN ZORNES’ THOUGHTS ON IT

Jane Austen – Totally Irrelevant


The post The Content Cluster Muster (07.20.17) appeared first on Blog & Mablog.

Categories: People I don't know

Double standards in the church?

Anglican Ink - Thu, 20/07/2017 - 16:24

Chris Sugden and Vinay Samuel ask why the Church of England's leadership has a selective sense of outrage

Fuller Theological Seminary to close satellite campuses

Anglican Ink - Thu, 20/07/2017 - 16:11

Letter from Fuller President announcing closure of Seattle, Menlo Park and Orange County campuses due to declining enrollment

Charlie and Noel. Two sides of a real human dilemma

The Good Book Company - Thu, 20/07/2017 - 14:43

Once again, British courts are in session arguing over two very different cases. Noel Conway who is in the early stages of Motor Nerone Disease, is arguing for the right to be given a lethal dose when his health deteriorates further. Meanwhile, the parents of Baby Charlie Gard are arguing for the right to live. Doctors at Great Ormond Street Children’s Hospital are prepared to remove life support for Charlie, as his degenerative mitochondrial disease has advanced, they believe, beyond hope. His parents want the right to allow the child to receive experimental treatment from an American doctor.

We must never be heard only to be saying “no”. Our message is a gloriously positive one.

Their tragic stories have created a groundswell of popular support, and, in both cases, on first sight, it appears to be heartless and lacking in any compassion to disagree with their wishes. But there is something much deeper going on that Christians need to be aware of if we are to enter intelligently into this discussion.

Vaughan Roberts lays out the problem in his recent book: 

Stories such as these appear regularly in the context of the ongoing discussions about whether assisted suicide should be made legal. They illustrate the complexity of the subject and the potential dangers associated with the relaxation of the law. But, above all, they remind us that behind the moral and legal debates are real people facing extremely difficult circumstances…

As I was preparing to write this book, my own father was told that he had terminal brain cancer, and he died a few months later. That has meant that I have not only been thinking about some of the issues raised in this book, but have also been very much living them as I have been writing. The whole experience has strengthened my conviction that assisted suicide should be firmly resisted, but it has also given me a more personal insight into the intense pain involved in the circumstances that often trigger the discussion.

End-of-life decisions will never be straightforward. Christians believe in life, because we believe in the God who is the author and giver of life. But we also believe in death as a reality in our fallen world. It is not always right to pour huge amounts of money and effort into keeping someone alive; sometimes it is better for them, and for their friends and family to withdraw treatment and allow them to die naturally. Some who are terminally ill and their loved ones can lose perspective in the emotion and sorrow of the situation—they will clutch at straws, and see hope where there is none. Encouraging them to cling on and receive every possible treatment, is not always advisable.

Christians will always want to engage in discussions on this subject with understanding and compassion, especially when the conversation is with someone who is speaking from personal experience. We can offer to pray, we can show Jesus’ love by giving emotional and practical support. And when appropriate, we can talk about the convictions that undergird our position: 

We must never be heard only to be saying “no”. Our message is a gloriously positive one: the great value of every human life, the dignity of mutual dependence, and the sovereign love of God working in and through suffering, as seen supremely in Christ.

Assisted Dying by Vaughan Roberts will help you think through the issues surrounding these cases and others, and help you engage positively in the debate about Assisted dying.

Categories: Christian Resources

Fake news in The Guardian

Adam Smith Institute - Thu, 20/07/2017 - 14:30

Oh dear, how embarrassing. The Guardian’s George Monbiot appears to have fallen hook, line and sinker for Nancy Maclean’s poorly (dishonestly?) researched book Democracy in Chains.

Democracy in Chains smears Nobel Laureate James Buchanan (amongst others) with deliberate misquotes and pernicious accusations of racism. It asserts that Buchanan sat at the centre of an elaborate academic conspiracy to undermine democracy and replace it with ‘a totalitarian capitalism’.

Of course, this isn’t the first time Monbiot’s been taken in by a BS Vendor who happens to share his political biases – he frequently cites Naomi Klein’s sloppy Shock Doctrine which proposed a similar right-wing academic conspiracy with Milton Friedman at the centre (thoroughly debunked by Johan Norberg at Cato).

Unlike Maclean herself, it’s not clear if Monbiot actually understands what public choice theory (the field where Buchanan made his name) is.

He writes:

James Buchanan brought these influences together to create what he called public choice theory. He argued that a society could not be considered free unless every citizen has the right to veto its decisions. What he meant by this was that no one should be taxed against their will. But the rich were being exploited by people who use their votes to demand money that others have earned, through involuntary taxes to support public spending and welfare. Allowing workers to form trade unions and imposing graduated income taxes were forms of “differential or discriminatory legislation” against the owners of capital.

Not quite.

Public choice theory isn't a set of political conclusions, it's a method of study pioneered by centre-left academics Kenneth Arrow and Anthony Downs who applied the tools of economics (e.g. rational choice theory) to the problem of political science. Buchanan describes it as “politics without the romance”. Essentially, it is a theory that predicts politics will be closer to Yes Minister than The West Wing. Indeed, Anthony Jay created Yes Minister to popularise the ideas of public choice theory.

Supporters of free and open markets tend to be drawn to Buchanan’s work in particular as it helps to answer questions like:

· Why do industrial strategies always end up subsidising losers rather than backing winners?

· Why are there three times as many bureaucrats at the Department of Agriculture than there are farms in the USA?

· Why do NIMBYs have so much power?

There are legitimate criticisms of Buchanan’s approach to public choice theory. It isn’t (or at least shouldn’t be) a theory of everything. As Ben Southwood points out, voters don’t vote solely out of self interest, they vote for the policies that they think will be best for society as a whole.

But Nancy Maclean doesn’t make those criticisms. She resorts to sloppy misquotes to paint James Buchanan as a supporter of racial segregation. An accusation repeated by Monbiot here:

He explained how attempts to desegregate schooling in the American south could be frustrated by setting up a network of state-sponsored private schools.

An explosive claim, but untrue. David Bernstein in the Washington Post writes

Meanwhile, in Chapter 3, MacLean claims that contemporary libertarians “eschewing overt racial appeals, but not at all concerned with the impact on black citizens, framed the South’s fight as resistance to federal coercion in a noble quest to preserve states’ right and economic liberty. Nothing energized this backwater movement like Brown.” MacLean identifies only two such libertarians, Frank Chodorov and Robert LeFevre. I can’t check her citation to LeFevre, because it’s from private correspondence that I don’t have access to. But her citation to Chodorov fails to support her assertion.

The article she cites by Chodorov can be found here. In it, Chodorov praises Brown: “The ultimate validation of the Court decision, which undoubtedly ranks among the most important in American history, lies in the fact that it is in line with what is deepest and strongest and most generous in our historical tradition.” Chodorov goes on to point out that merely prohibiting segregated schools won’t lead to integration because of residential segregation, and concludes that hostility to integration may lead some southern states to open up publicly-funded education to competitive private schools, which would mean “what began as an attempt to evade an unavoidable change in an obsolete system of racial segregation might turn into an interesting educational experiment.

This wasn’t Maclean’s only ‘mistake’. David Henderson at EconLib highlighted a particularly egregious misquote.

Maclean writes

'People who failed to foresee and save money for their future needs', Buchanan wrote in 2005, ‘are to be treated as subordinate members of the species, akin to . . . animals who are dependent.’

Contrast that with what Buchanan actually wrote

The classical liberal is necessarily vulnerable to the charge that he lacks compassion in behavior toward fellow human beings - a quality that may describe the conservative position, along with others that involve paternalism on any grounds. George W. Bush's "compassionate conservatism" can be articulated and defended as a meaningful normative stance. The comparable term "compassionate classical liberalism" would approach oxymoronic classification. There is no halfway house here; other persons are to be treated as natural equals, deserving of equal respect and individually responsible for their actions, or they are to be treated as subordinate members of the species, akin to that accorded animals who are dependent.

Maclean doesn’t just get this quotation wrong—she edits it so that it says exactly the opposite of what Buchanan actually wrote.

This isn’t an aberration. It’s not a sloppy mistake in an otherwise well-researched book. This is Maclean’s modus operandi.

Russ Roberts highlights a passage from Maclean smearing the economist Tyler Cowen.

The weakening of the checks and balances” in the American system, Cowen suggested, would increase the chance of a very good outcome.” Alas, given the pervasive reverence for the US Constitution, a direct bid to manipulate the system could prove ‘disastrous’.

Maclean describes Cowen as “creating…a handbook for how to conduct a fifth-column assault on democracy.” A claim that will seem absurd to anyone familar with Cowen's work.

Compare that to Cowen’s original passage

While the weakening of checks and balances would increase the chance of a very good outcome, it would also increase the chance of a very bad outcome. Furthermore, the widely perceived legitimacy of the US Constitution suggests that such a change would involve disastrous transition costs.

As Roberts writes

MacLean left out the word “While” that begins Cowen’s sentence. Then she left off the key qualifier that completes the sentence — the point that the downside risk of weakening checks and balances is substantial. There is nothing here suggesting Cowen is in favor of weakening democracy or the Constitution. By quoting only a piece of Cowen’s sentence, MacLean reverses his meaning.

It would be easy to list a dozen more errors but Michael Munger, Christopher Fleming, Phil Magness and Greg Wiener have already done it for me.

Regrettably, The Guardian’s George Monbiot has been taken in by Maclean’s selective quoting and sloppy research.

I am sure it was not Monbiot’s intention to mislead his readership and I expect he will retract his article, clarify his mistake and apologise to the scholars who have been a victim of Maclean’s academic malpractice.

Categories: Current Affairs

Imunify360 2.3-32 released

CloudLinux - Thu, 20/07/2017 - 14:02

We are pleased to announce that the new Imunify360 2.3-32 production version is now available. The latest version embodies further improvements of the product as well as the new features. Imunify360 also has become more reliable and stable due to the bug fixes described below.

Should you encounter any problems with the product or have any questions, comments or suggestions, please contact our support team at cloudlinux.zendesk.com: Imunify360 department. We’d be more than happy to help you.

Imunify360 2.3-32

Changelog:

  • renamed "Move files to quarantine" option and changed description;
  • DEF-2178: backport - extended info for quarantined files (UI);
  • DEF-2406: fixed incorrect domains count in infected-domains.

To install new Imunify360 production version 2.3-32 please follow the instructions in the documentation.

To upgrade Imunify360 run:

yum clean all yum update imunify360-firewall

More information on Imunify360 can be found here.

Categories: Technology

HardenedPHP updated

CloudLinux - Thu, 20/07/2017 - 13:43

The new updated HardenedPHP packages are available for download from our production repository.

Changelog:

alt-php71-7.1.7-2

alt-php70-7.0.21-2

alt-php56-5.6.31-2

  • ALTPHP-351: made lsphp error messages more informative;
  • ALTPHP-354: SIGCHILD handler fix after CRIU restoring.

alt-php55-5.5.38-19

  • CVE-2017-11143: wddx parsing empty boolean tag leads to SIGSEGV;
  • CVE-2017-11144: negative-size-param (-1) in memcpy in zif_openssl_seal();
  • CVE-2017-11145: wddx_deserialize() heap out-of-bound read via php_parse_date();
  • CVE-2017-11146: wddx_deserialize() heap out-of-bound read via php_parse_date() (caused by CVE-2017-11145);
  • CVE-2017-7890: Buffer over-read into uninitialized memory;
  • CVE-2017-9224: Buffer Overflow in match_at() (Oniguruma issue);
  • CVE-2017-9226: Heap corruption in next_state_val() in 15 encodings (Oniguruma issue);
  • CVE-2017-9227: Bug in mbc_enc_len() (Oniguruma issue);
  • CVE-2017-9228: Heap corruption in next_state_val() due to uninitialized local variable (Oniguruma issue);
  • CVE-2017-9229: SIGSEGV in left_adjust_char_head() due to bad dereference (Oniguruma issue);
  • bug74087: Segmentation fault in PHP7.1.1(compiled using the bundled PCRE library);
  • bug74603: PHP INI Parsing Stack Buffer Overflow Vulnerability;
  • ALTPHP-351: made lsphp error messages more informative;
  • ALTPHP-354: SIGCHILD handler fix after CRIU restoring.

alt-php54-5.4.45-37

  • CVE-2017-11143: wddx parsing empty boolean tag leads to SIGSEGV;
  • CVE-2017-11144: negative-size-param (-1) in memcpy in zif_openssl_seal();
  • CVE-2017-11145: wddx_deserialize() heap out-of-bound read via php_parse_date();
  • CVE-2017-11146: wddx_deserialize() heap out-of-bound read via php_parse_date() (caused by CVE-2017-11145);
  • CVE-2017-7890: Buffer over-read into uninitialized memory;
  • CVE-2017-9224: Buffer Overflow in match_at() (Oniguruma issue);
  • CVE-2017-9226: Heap corruption in next_state_val() in 15 encodings (Oniguruma issue);
  • CVE-2017-9227: Bug in mbc_enc_len() (Oniguruma issue);
  • CVE-2017-9228: Heap corruption in next_state_val() due to uninitialized local variable (Oniguruma issue);
  • CVE-2017-9229: SIGSEGV in left_adjust_char_head() due to bad dereference (Oniguruma issue);
  • bug70436: Use After Free Vulnerability in unserialize();
  • bug74087: Segmentation fault in PHP7.1.1(compiled using the bundled PCRE library);
  • bug74603: PHP INI Parsing Stack Buffer Overflow Vulnerability;
  • ALTPHP-351: made lsphp error messages more informative;
  • ALTPHP-354: SIGCHILD handler fix after CRIU restoring.

alt-php53-5.3.29-53

  • CVE-2017-11143: wddx parsing empty boolean tag leads to SIGSEGV;
  • CVE-2017-11144: negative-size-param (-1) in memcpy in zif_openssl_seal();
  • CVE-2017-11145: wddx_deserialize() heap out-of-bound read via php_parse_date();
  • CVE-2017-11146: wddx_deserialize() heap out-of-bound read via php_parse_date() (caused by CVE-2017-11145);
  • CVE-2017-7890: Buffer over-read into uninitialized memory;
  • CVE-2017-9224: Buffer Overflow in match_at() (Oniguruma issue);
  • CVE-2017-9226: Heap corruption in next_state_val() in 15 encodings (Oniguruma issue);
  • CVE-2017-9227: Bug in mbc_enc_len() (Oniguruma issue);
  • CVE-2017-9228: Heap corruption in next_state_val() due to uninitialized local variable (Oniguruma issue);
  • CVE-2017-9229: SIGSEGV in left_adjust_char_head() due to bad dereference (Oniguruma issue);
  • bug70436: Use After Free Vulnerability in unserialize();
  • bug74603: PHP INI Parsing Stack Buffer Overflow Vulnerability;
  • ALTPHP-351: made lsphp error messages more informative;
  • ALTPHP-354: SIGCHILD handler fix after CRIU restoring.

alt-php52-5.2.17-103

  • CVE-2017-11143: wddx parsing empty boolean tag leads to SIGSEGV;
  • CVE-2017-11144: negative-size-param (-1) in memcpy in zif_openssl_seal();
  • CVE-2017-11145: wddx_deserialize() heap out-of-bound read via php_parse_date();
  • CVE-2017-11146: wddx_deserialize() heap out-of-bound read via php_parse_date() (caused by CVE-2017-11145);
  • CVE-2017-7890: Buffer over-read into uninitialized memory;
  • CVE-2017-9224: Buffer Overflow in match_at() (Oniguruma issue);
  • CVE-2017-9226: Heap corruption in next_state_val() in 15 encodings (Oniguruma issue);
  • CVE-2017-9227: Bug in mbc_enc_len() (Oniguruma issue);
  • CVE-2017-9228: Heap corruption in next_state_val() due to uninitialized local variable (Oniguruma issue);
  • CVE-2017-9229: SIGSEGV in left_adjust_char_head() due to bad dereference (Oniguruma issue);
  • bug70436: Use After Free Vulnerability in unserialize();
  • bug74603: PHP INI Parsing Stack Buffer Overflow Vulnerability;
  • ALTPHP-351: made lsphp error messages more informative;
  • ALTPHP-354: SIGCHILD handler fix after CRIU restoring.

alt-php51-5.1.6-77

  • CVE-2017-11143: wddx parsing empty boolean tag leads to SIGSEGV;
  • CVE-2017-11144: negative-size-param (-1) in memcpy in zif_openssl_seal();
  • CVE-2017-11145: wddx_deserialize() heap out-of-bound read via php_parse_date();
  • CVE-2017-11146: wddx_deserialize() heap out-of-bound read via php_parse_date() (caused by CVE-2017-11145);
  • CVE-2017-7890: Buffer over-read into uninitialized memory;
  • CVE-2017-9224: Buffer Overflow in match_at() (Oniguruma issue);
  • CVE-2017-9226: Heap corruption in next_state_val() in 15 encodings (Oniguruma issue);
  • CVE-2017-9227: Bug in mbc_enc_len() (Oniguruma issue);
  • CVE-2017-9228: Heap corruption in next_state_val() due to uninitialized local variable (Oniguruma issue);
  • CVE-2017-9229: SIGSEGV in left_adjust_char_head() due to bad dereference (Oniguruma issue);
  • bug70436: Use After Free Vulnerability in unserialize();
  • bug74603: PHP INI Parsing Stack Buffer Overflow Vulnerability;
  • ALTPHP-351: made lsphp error messages more informative;
  • ALTPHP-354: SIGCHILD handler fix after CRIU restoring.

alt-php44-4.4.9-67

  • CVE-2017-11143: wddx parsing empty boolean tag leads to SIGSEGV;
  • CVE-2017-11144: negative-size-param (-1) in memcpy in zif_openssl_seal();
  • CVE-2017-7890: Buffer over-read into uninitialized memory;
  • bug70436: Use After Free Vulnerability in unserialize();
  • bug74603: PHP INI Parsing Stack Buffer Overflow Vulnerability;
  • ALTPHP-351: made lsphp error messages more informative;
  • ALTPHP-354: SIGCHILD handler fix after CRIU restoring.

alt-pcre-8.40-1

  • updated to 8.40.

To install run:

yum groupinstall alt-php
Categories: Technology

PHP 7.2.0 Beta 1 Released

PHP - Thu, 20/07/2017 - 13:00
Categories: Technology

Pages

Subscribe to oakleys.org.uk aggregator
Additional Terms