> 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.
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?
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.