Dude. Do you see a single source in this article or line indicating that OP did any original research or reporting whatsoever? Did you not look at the earlier Wired article and notice how all the language in OP is copied straight from it with some rearranging? Do all the ads and signups and links to other 'articles' on this site really look legit to you? Did you just come out of a cave and the phenomenon of blogs thinly plagiarizing regular media to create content-slurry to sell ads on is novel to you? The question is not 'what evidence do I have that it plagiarized', the question is 'why on earth are you not assuming by default that this site is plagiarizing until proven otherwise'?
The burden of proof doesn't work that way, and your initial comment offered no elaboration about why it was plagiarised. An explanation was called for.
