Whenever something gets upvoted very fast in a manner that doesn't seem consistent with a site's regular usage, suspect that it's botted/been paid for by rival companies.
Anything getting 300+ points in 3 hours is rarely organic. There's almost nothing else currently on the front page with this kind of votes/time ratio, besides the post about Google banning accounts.
In one sentence you show that you are aware of the piece's satire, and in the next you question whether the author truly believes everything he says?
I think it's pretty obvious that the article was not meant to be taken completely seriously and is poking humour at some "familiar" experiences.
Or are people just upvoting something because it's the kind of lazy hot take that's candy for socially ranked sites like this? This is why I believe sites like HN and Reddit often make their readers dumber despite surfacing good information.