Morning Reading

1. Jetpacks. Although, is it me, or is the embedded video horrible? Why couldn't the cameraman have gotten all of him hovering in frame?

2. The University of Chicago is known for being advocates for free markets and "conservative" (for lack of a better word) economic policy. So what do they think about Obama, who once taught con law in the law school? The New Republic has a kind of social/intellectual biographical piece about Obama, from the perspective the University of Chicago. Reading pieces like these always lightens my mood and even gives me hope, though don't tell my wife as then I may have to eat my words for making fun of how much hope with she is filled.

3. I know MoLT is going to love this one. Google maps meets wikipedia to map diseases internationally. The only question I have is why wasn't this done sooner? What a great idea. F.A. Hayek would also be pleased.

4. The Tax Foundation refutes an anti-Obama tax meme that is circulating.

5. Is it censorship when editors block inclusion of John Edwards' current "love child" scandal from his wikipedia page on the grounds that inclusion violates WIkipedia's "Do No Harm" principle? That's a serious question. We need a law review article written about it, methinks, to flesh out the issue better.

6. Kottke linked to the below youtube of Michael Chang's underhanded serve in 1989. Not being a tennis fan (but being from a family of tennis players), I thought I'd check out the wikipedia page (notwithstanding #5, I believe Wikipedia's incredibly useful as an encyclopedia. Just not so much for controversial topics). I was really inspired reading about how he fought his way back using some novel tactics, all the while fighting nearly debilitating leg cramps.