<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Yet Another Gadget Site</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.robhyndman.com/2006/08/11/yet-another-gadget-site/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.robhyndman.com/2006/08/11/yet-another-gadget-site/</link>
	<description>any technology distinguishable from magic is not sufficiently advanced</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Thu, 02 Feb 2012 09:32:11 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.2.1</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: Scott</title>
		<link>http://www.robhyndman.com/2006/08/11/yet-another-gadget-site/comment-page-1/#comment-10008</link>
		<dc:creator>Scott</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 16 Aug 2006 21:51:11 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.robhyndman.com/2006/08/11/yet-another-gadget-site/#comment-10008</guid>
		<description>Yes, yet another gadget site, lazily linking to the gadget stories featured on the other gadget sites, which have been interbreeding &amp; cross-pollinating for years.  I&#039;d happily welcome a new gadget site, if, in fact, it were *new*.  

Rob, I don&#039;t think Mr Arrington needs additional hours in his day to run CrunchGear; apparently, all you have to do is take an occasional glance at a few other gadget sites, paraphrase their stories, throw up a big, &quot;Web 2.0-style&quot; photo, and add a little link back to the original story.  Take Gizmodo, for example.  As of this moment, there are 18 stories on page one.  Of those 18, one seems to have come from a reader&#039;s submission, four seem to be original content, and 13 are from other gadget sites.  That means nearly 80% of their content comes from someone else&#039;s efforts.  Nice gig.  

Back to CrunchGear.  14 stories on page one (plus one &quot;give-away&quot; contest post), 13 of which were &quot;borrowed&quot; from other sites (including 4 from Gizmodo, and 2 from Engadget).  That leaves 1 &quot;original&quot; story.  93% of CrunchGear content was simply copied from other sites.  Is that what Mr Arrington calls &quot;unique?&quot;

&quot;Extraordinary?&quot;  No.  Extra ordinary.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Yes, yet another gadget site, lazily linking to the gadget stories featured on the other gadget sites, which have been interbreeding &amp; cross-pollinating for years.  I&#8217;d happily welcome a new gadget site, if, in fact, it were *new*.  </p>
<p>Rob, I don&#8217;t think Mr Arrington needs additional hours in his day to run CrunchGear; apparently, all you have to do is take an occasional glance at a few other gadget sites, paraphrase their stories, throw up a big, &#8220;Web 2.0-style&#8221; photo, and add a little link back to the original story.  Take Gizmodo, for example.  As of this moment, there are 18 stories on page one.  Of those 18, one seems to have come from a reader&#8217;s submission, four seem to be original content, and 13 are from other gadget sites.  That means nearly 80% of their content comes from someone else&#8217;s efforts.  Nice gig.  </p>
<p>Back to CrunchGear.  14 stories on page one (plus one &#8220;give-away&#8221; contest post), 13 of which were &#8220;borrowed&#8221; from other sites (including 4 from Gizmodo, and 2 from Engadget).  That leaves 1 &#8220;original&#8221; story.  93% of CrunchGear content was simply copied from other sites.  Is that what Mr Arrington calls &#8220;unique?&#8221;</p>
<p>&#8220;Extraordinary?&#8221;  No.  Extra ordinary.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>

