That's a stretch by any interpretation. Its obvious to me that an electronic amendment is overdue. Can we come up with a test for 'amendment required'? It can't be about what's 'obvious' to someone.
And therein lies the rub. Interpretation vs. legislating from the bench is in the eye of the beholder.
Doesn't matter anymore, though -- the majority of people, whether liberal or conservative, don't really care about freedom or laws anymore, or what the Constitution actually says. They just want the government and the courts to decide their way, regardless of whether it is good jurisprudence.
