Interview with me, and a really slick UI

The summer 2009 issue of h+ Magazine is out, and there's an interview with yours truly. The reporter, Tyson Anderson, and I had an interesting conversation about the history of biohacking, how I got started with it, the diverse nature of DIYbio, the importance of the amateurs in the history of science, and some of the ethical issues surrounding this hobby.

(Yes, yes, enochsmiles, I need to put together a press page for my website. I know.)

But until then, check out that nice interface! They've definitely achieved the look and functionality of a paper magazine (minus being able to dog-ear the pages or scribble notes in the margin), and halle-freakin-lujah, each page is uniquely addressable! There are only two things I can dock them points on. First is the fact that their "share a bookmark" feature is so tightly coupled to a host of social networking services, many of which are walled gardens. (LJ happens not to be one of them. When did we jump the shark, guys?) This is, however, the fault of AddThis, provider of the feature in question; I can extract the URL I want by, say, clicking on the Google Bookmarks link and then copying said URL, but that is kind of a pain. Hey, AddThis, can we have a plain ol' "URL" option? That would be swell, thanks.

Second, not being able to copy and paste text == also a pain. Minus that, though, I could totally get used to reading magazine content online with an interface like this.

PSA

If you tried to reach me at my current stateside number sometime in the last 24 hours, it probably failed. This has been fixed. Kthxbye.

Am I missing something?

joedecker points out that Obama has asked SCOTUS not to hear a DADT case currently being considered for certiorari.

This annoys me, but Joe, as usual, has accurately captured my annoyance, so go read his post if you want that. Here's my thing. This is only one of several times in the last few weeks that I've read an article about Obama asking SCOTUS not to hear a case. We've got the administration asking SCOTUS not to hear appeals from Valerie Plame and her husband vs. several Bush II officials, families of people killed during 9/11 vs. Saudi Arabia and several Saudi princes (yes, that's a forum, but go read the brief), and some Uighur Muslim Gitmo detainees who want to be released into the US. He's also asked for an overturn of Michigan v. Jackson, which would allow police to interrogate a defendant who has a lawyer (or who has asked for one) without that lawyer being present, which of course opens up all kinds of nightsticky opportunities. (Yeah, txtriffidranch, I know -- use a length of garden hose filled with lead shot and that nun won't have a mark on her. It's the principle of the thing.)

And, of course, despite having promised that, if elected, he would end warrantless wiretapping, he's already broken that promise (though, to be fair, we did see this one coming last summer when he was still a senator.)

What. The hell. Is up. With that? Historically, I know Presidents have clashed with SCOTUS before -- FDR, Nixon -- but since when does the President run around telling the court what to hear and not to hear? Was this just something that didn't get a lot of coverage the last few presidencies, or is Obama actively continuing the monstrous power grabs that eight years of Bush softened us up for?

(Yes, yes, I know the articles all say he's "asking", but really, grow up -- they're putting it nicely.)