What the Paper says?
This is a (usually brief) personal—but public—account or summary of a scientific paper that is of interest to us, for one reason or another, maybe because it was put on our reading list. You can access the editor's page of the journal by clicking on its reference, i.e., clicking on 109:183601 in the example below:
Theory of Frequency-Filtered and Time-Resolved $N$-Photon Correlations. E. del Valle, A. González-Tudela, F. P. Laussy, C. Tejedor and M. J. Hartmann in Phys. Rev. Lett. 109:183601 (2012). 
The title itself brings you to the page of the said article. Some Authors also have their own page on this website, especially if they are us or co-authors (or important, inspiring, or sometimes, only random people) and we might even have something to say about the scientific journal itself, although only Physics Physique физика is interesting. The year might bring you to personal stuff, if a recent one, but hey, you're on our website after all, and we're the type of not drawing any frontiers! A pdf is provided for our own papers. The extracts given for other papers are for educative and research purposes only.
The focus given on the material is, naturally, the one that drives us to it, so we may consider irrelevant parts of it but that have some special meaning for us. To get a fair and complete idea of the paper, of course, read it yourself. We may also make personal comments, criticisms or praise that are beyond a mere review of the scientific content. The responsibility for mistakes, inaccuracies and other distortions is, of course, entirely ours, but is one for our reputation only. Those notes are, again, an exercise and game, not validated, full-proof academic matter. For that, please refer to our publications.
Why do you do this?
First, because this is useful for us. It often is the case that one forgets what they had to say about something they studied (or merely read) and that reading one's own account of previous memories helps to remember salient points. After all, as discovered by Bernanos, times make us different people.
Second, because that's a useful exercise to get deeper into the actual content of the paper.
Third, because it might be useful and/or interesting to other people. If you have your own comments on our comments, you can pass them to us and we shall happily include them (if relevant, of course). So far we only got feedback on a movie where I confused a woman playing a transexual with a transgender, and the input (I'm not entirely sure this was an actual correction) was duly added to the page.