As you might guess, my site is one of the sources of content. If you're reading this post at New York Articles rather than at my actual site, you are partaking of a suboptimal experience.
I'm not going to give you the URL for the lesser, because there is no value-added to speak of, unless you count the pennies that come in to the leech that grabs the RSS and sells the Google Ads.
Does such a site do anything to improve an already crowded blogosphere? Does anyone treat a sloppy feed aggregating site of this sort as a regular destination (or really, as anything but an accidental destination)?
Pathetic.
More like this
Vladimir Kushnir describes how Symantec's censorware blocks access to many pro-gun websites such as nra.org, under the category 'W
In a year-long investigation that involved more than 100 Freedom of Information Act requests to EPA, the Center for Public Integrity discovered that Superfund site cleanups are being started and completed more slo
According to a study published in the medical journal, Pediatrics,
girls and young women who visit eating disorder oriented websites may
be harmed by the activity. The funny thing is, is does not
matter if the sites encourage eating disorder behavior, or discourage
Chris O'Brien at Northstate Science gave a speedy reply to my questions of this morning.
Unfortunately, Razib, the nyarticles.com site is now serving up popups from a .tr domain, so I would highly advise against visiting that site without adequate popup and virus protection. I've emailed the scienceblogs.com webmaster to see if he can block their domain and IPs.