3 ms·

look at whats popular now vs what was when posted, and all the throwaways. im curious- do you think its rare that there are paid posters on hn? i think its fair

look at whats popular now vs what was when posted, and all the throwaways. im curious- do you think its rare that there are paid posters on hn? i think its fairly common for pr firms on behalf of tech companies, and less so but still very probable for political special interests

nkurz 8y ago
do you think it's rare that there are paid posters on hn? It depends on definitions. There are certainly URL submissions done by PR firms, but I think most of these are low quality and flagged. There are all sorts of small businesses that do self-promotion through HN, with varying degrees of success. There are certainly others who tend to upvote the companies that pay them, but I think this is usually because they like their job rather than because upvoting is considered part of their job. I don't think that any significant number of prominent upvoted comments are created for hire, though. I think most comments are written by people who believe what they are saying, and that there are just so many ways for people to disagree that the things that seem unbelievable are just evidence that people are different. i think its fairly common for pr firms on behalf of tech companies It's certainly possible, but I'd love to see stronger evidence for it. Specifically, I'd guess that it is rare for major companies to pay individuals specifically to write comments on HN they don't believe so as to put that company in a positive light. For example, although people are frequently accused of being shills for Apple and Google, I'm doubtful that these companies pay anyone on a per comment basis to make pro-Apple or pro-Google comments. But I'd very eagerly read proof to the contrary. less so but still very probable for political special interests This is actually the one that I'm more inclined to believe. I think at least some of the pro-China, pro-Russia, pro-Israel, and probably even pro-America comments are being written by people paid to represent the interests of these countries online. But I think in most cases, the writer is also a patriotic citizen of those countries, and thus is likely to believe the propaganda they are spreading. But I'd be interested to see proof of this too. As a counter-question, do you know anyone who is being paid for their comments here? Or read articles written by anyone confessing to being paid to be a commenter here?
- jancsika 8y ago
  > It's certainly possible, but I'd love to see stronger evidence for it. If you indeed want strong evidence for it, I think there is a way to get it. 1. Read up on the movement to free Tibet, the current geopolitical situation in the Ukraine, and... hm, perhaps Wikileaks or Assange? Not sure on the last one, there may be a better topic. Bonus points for researching the boycott of Israeli products. 2. Gather up the most well-researched articles from well-respected scholars on each topic. Make a note of the most novel points-- things that, say, a layperson would be unlikely to know. On the other hand, make sure your novel points are based purely in fact and not speculation or opinion of the author. You'll want equal number of novel points from each category. Once you have a decent collection of novel "conversation starters," then for each post you make on HN randomly choose of one of your novel points. If it can be used sensibly as an analogy or reference in your post, make it. If not, don't. As your nation-state bait starts to make its way into your posts, read the responses and measure what you get against what you got before you started the process. Ignore responses that merely point out that you chose a hot-button analogy, but count any that attempt to refute your novel points. If you encounter regular refutations on a single one of your categories, that's something to keep an eye on. If you notice regular refutations of two of the categories, that's stronger confirmation that something is going on. And if you get refutations on all three topics, then congratulations! You've probably baited three nation-state disinformation campaigns into spending time and effort on your HN posts. There is of course a shortcut. If, upon reading this, you feel that the risks of doing this clearly outweigh any potential benefits, then congratulations! Our social media tools are probably so easily and cheaply manipulated by state actors that we may as well go ahead and assume there are paid state actors posting on HN.
  - nkurz 8y ago
    I feel like there is an important distinction between "paid actors" and "true believers", but I don't think your model distinguishes these. Do you think the approach you propose can separate these, or do you think this distinction just doesn't matter?

nkurz 8y ago

do you think it's rare that there are paid posters on hn? It depends on definitions. There are certainly URL submissions done by PR firms, but I think most of these are low quality and flagged. There are all sorts of small businesses that do self-promotion through HN, with varying degrees of success. There are certainly others who tend to upvote the companies that pay them, but I think this is usually because they like their job rather than because upvoting is considered part of their job. I don't think that any significant number of prominent upvoted comments are created for hire, though. I think most comments are written by people who believe what they are saying, and that there are just so many ways for people to disagree that the things that seem unbelievable are just evidence that people are different. i think its fairly common for pr firms on behalf of tech companies It's certainly possible, but I'd love to see stronger evidence for it. Specifically, I'd guess that it is rare for major companies to pay individuals specifically to write comments on HN they don't believe so as to put that company in a positive light. For example, although people are frequently accused of being shills for Apple and Google, I'm doubtful that these companies pay anyone on a per comment basis to make pro-Apple or pro-Google comments. But I'd very eagerly read proof to the contrary. less so but still very probable for political special interests This is actually the one that I'm more inclined to believe. I think at least some of the pro-China, pro-Russia, pro-Israel, and probably even pro-America comments are being written by people paid to represent the interests of these countries online. But I think in most cases, the writer is also a patriotic citizen of those countries, and thus is likely to believe the propaganda they are spreading. But I'd be interested to see proof of this too. As a counter-question, do you know anyone who is being paid for their comments here? Or read articles written by anyone confessing to being paid to be a commenter here?

jancsika 8y ago
> It's certainly possible, but I'd love to see stronger evidence for it. If you indeed want strong evidence for it, I think there is a way to get it. 1. Read up on the movement to free Tibet, the current geopolitical situation in the Ukraine, and... hm, perhaps Wikileaks or Assange? Not sure on the last one, there may be a better topic. Bonus points for researching the boycott of Israeli products. 2. Gather up the most well-researched articles from well-respected scholars on each topic. Make a note of the most novel points-- things that, say, a layperson would be unlikely to know. On the other hand, make sure your novel points are based purely in fact and not speculation or opinion of the author. You'll want equal number of novel points from each category. Once you have a decent collection of novel "conversation starters," then for each post you make on HN randomly choose of one of your novel points. If it can be used sensibly as an analogy or reference in your post, make it. If not, don't. As your nation-state bait starts to make its way into your posts, read the responses and measure what you get against what you got before you started the process. Ignore responses that merely point out that you chose a hot-button analogy, but count any that attempt to refute your novel points. If you encounter regular refutations on a single one of your categories, that's something to keep an eye on. If you notice regular refutations of two of the categories, that's stronger confirmation that something is going on. And if you get refutations on all three topics, then congratulations! You've probably baited three nation-state disinformation campaigns into spending time and effort on your HN posts. There is of course a shortcut. If, upon reading this, you feel that the risks of doing this clearly outweigh any potential benefits, then congratulations! Our social media tools are probably so easily and cheaply manipulated by state actors that we may as well go ahead and assume there are paid state actors posting on HN.
- nkurz 8y ago
  I feel like there is an important distinction between "paid actors" and "true believers", but I don't think your model distinguishes these. Do you think the approach you propose can separate these, or do you think this distinction just doesn't matter?