Okay, the answer to that question is, and probably always will be, 'Oh hell, yes!'.
So let me rephrase - I have a somewhat insane idea, and I'm not sure if I should go through with it or not.
My main weakness as a scientist is my lack of background knowledge (okay, that, and staying up to date with my lab book. Let's never mention that again). I don't read the literature. Firstly, because I'm spending so much time doing the actual lab work, which my boss, understandably, considers far more important than reading papers. Secondly, because it's boring. I mean, the science itself, the moment where you go 'So THAT's how it works!' and are all impressed by how the other people worked it out, is incredibly cool. But the language we're expected to use to convey this discovery beats all the excitement out of it with a crowbar made of Boring.
But, really, I have no excuse. It would only take an hour to get through a paper properly. Two if I happen to write a little bit on it. Like a mini review/explanation, basically all the fun stuff. On a blog. Say, once a week.
So that's my idea - to do a Papers Cannonball, alongside the book one. Would anybody be remotely interested in that? I'll try to write in layman's terms, and explain how/why it's exciting. It would help me out, and maybe if I think somebody is reading my 'review' (even if they're not!) I'll be more inclined to yanno, do that part of my job. Instead of just the parts that involve cutting out organs or dousing mice in cigarette smoke.