The operating cost of adult and gambling startups • Hacker News Board

Re: The operating cost of adult and gambling startups

#11

Post by 3form » Fri, Apr 24, 2026, 1:14 PM UTC

A_Duck wrote: post #3

What's the author trying to say here? It's good that the law isn't the only line between good and evil. A bit of stigma is a bottom-up way for people to shape society. If nobody invites you to dinner parties because you run a startup that combines payday-lending and day-trading, that's a good thing. It's free alpha for companies doing more worthwhile things.

I don't like mixing of everything 18+ in the article. I think the author wants to put all the stigma in one basket, and I don't it's as simple. For example, porn meets some actual human needs and has a certain function - but gambling? Simple abuse at scale.

I think like you argue, society shaping business is good. And some people should really reevaluate what they're going for if that's too much for them.

Re: The operating cost of adult and gambling startups

#12

Post by engineer_22 » Fri, Apr 24, 2026, 1:17 PM UTC

nickflw wrote: post #8

b40d-48b2-979e wrote: post #5

You may have a cool product in the field of sports betting, casinos, or lotteries. But almost all social networks and search engines won’t let you advertise without a license from the required jurisdiction. Good . You should face social stigma for creating products that literally ruin people's lives.

So true. I wish alcohol, tobacco, gun and insurance companies and their employees faced the same stigma.

I live in New York. A very old very famous manufacturer of firearms, Remington Arms, which employed hundreds of people and was the economic engine of its community was forced by the State of New York to shut down. That community cannot replace what was lost when the factory closed. Poverty, crime, drugs have moved in to the void.

You may be right that guns are are corrosive to a democratic society, that's an open debate. But the people who depended on that factory had the rug pulled and real harm was done without any regard to their welfare. And not everyone who depended on the factory worked there, deli owners and dry cleaners, these types of legitimate businesses are damaged when a major employer closes doors.

I suppose I relate this story to you just to show that, there are other people who think like you, guns are stigmatized, and it has a real human cost. We should not be flippant with our neighbor's well being, because we can't predict the turns of fate, one day it might be our turn.

Re: The operating cost of adult and gambling startups

#13

Post by strken » Fri, Apr 24, 2026, 1:17 PM UTC

A_Duck wrote: post #3

What's the author trying to say here? It's good that the law isn't the only line between good and evil. A bit of stigma is a bottom-up way for people to shape society. If nobody invites you to dinner parties because you run a startup that combines payday-lending and day-trading, that's a good thing. It's free alpha for companies doing more worthwhile things.

One of the clients I've worked with was a female-led sex toy manufacturer. It was a nuisance trying to dodge some of the roadblocks.

Stigma and regulatory pressure don't always mean the company is evil.

Re: The operating cost of adult and gambling startups

#14

Post by cj » Fri, Apr 24, 2026, 1:19 PM UTC

A_Duck wrote: post #3

What's the author trying to say here? It's good that the law isn't the only line between good and evil. A bit of stigma is a bottom-up way for people to shape society. If nobody invites you to dinner parties because you run a startup that combines payday-lending and day-trading, that's a good thing. It's free alpha for companies doing more worthwhile things.

> line between good and evil

Talking about good and evil in tech is a slippery slope.

What's worse, working at Meta building products causing addiction in kids, or building an adult content site?

I think there's an argument that Meta is morally worse, yet there's no stigma associated with having Meta on your resume. I find that interesting.

Re: The operating cost of adult and gambling startups

#15

Post by post-it » Fri, Apr 24, 2026, 1:20 PM UTC

> When posting job openings, you will always have to beat around the bush, without using direct language. And only then, when the candidate has already agreed to an interview or even after it, do you tell them what kind of content they will be working with every day.

> Employees join such projects for various reasons. Some realize that the pay is better than in legitimate projects. Others come because they couldn’t find a job where they wanted to, or because they are simply interested in working on something forbidden. And then a good company saving the world will come along and offer them a job, and they’ll leave. Building a stable team from people with this kind of motivation is hard.

I think OP made this whole article up. Everyone that applies for Aylo knows exactly what they're applying for. The pay is below-average because (a) there's not actually a lot of money in porn and (b) there's no shortage of dudes that want to work in it.

Re: The operating cost of adult and gambling startups

#16

Post by malfist » Fri, Apr 24, 2026, 1:20 PM UTC

jmkd wrote: post #10

b40d-48b2-979e wrote: post #5

You may have a cool product in the field of sports betting, casinos, or lotteries. But almost all social networks and search engines won’t let you advertise without a license from the required jurisdiction. Good . You should face social stigma for creating products that literally ruin people's lives.

There are plenty of other products that literally ruin people's lives: alcohol, tobacco, sugar, pharmaceuticals, credit cards, firearms, timeshares, junk food. Society has them all on very different parts of a stigma spectrum. Honest question: why is this line so clear for you?

Honest question, why isn't the line so clear for you?

We're talking about a product built to make people's lives worse while extracting wealth from them that get them addicted as well.

Re: The operating cost of adult and gambling startups

#17

Post by chirau » Fri, Apr 24, 2026, 1:21 PM UTC

groundzeros2015 wrote: post #9

I didn’t expect him to describe his own field as illegitimate. Somehow knowing you are doing bad things is even worse than a rationalization. Why spend your time with people who don’t believe in what they do?

I am pretty sure most companies and people doing bad things know they are doing bad things.

Re: The operating cost of adult and gambling startups

#18

Post by [deleted] » Fri, Apr 24, 2026, 1:22 PM UTC

nickflw wrote: post #8

b40d-48b2-979e wrote: post #5

You may have a cool product in the field of sports betting, casinos, or lotteries. But almost all social networks and search engines won’t let you advertise without a license from the required jurisdiction. Good . You should face social stigma for creating products that literally ruin people's lives.

So true. I wish alcohol, tobacco, gun and insurance companies and their employees faced the same stigma.

[deleted]

Re: The operating cost of adult and gambling startups

#19

Post by nekusar » Fri, Apr 24, 2026, 1:23 PM UTC

strken wrote: post #13

A_Duck wrote: post #3

What's the author trying to say here? It's good that the law isn't the only line between good and evil. A bit of stigma is a bottom-up way for people to shape society. If nobody invites you to dinner parties because you run a startup that combines payday-lending and day-trading, that's a good thing. It's free alpha for companies doing more worthwhile things.

One of the clients I've worked with was a female-led sex toy manufacturer. It was a nuisance trying to dodge some of the roadblocks. Stigma and regulatory pressure don't always mean the company is evil.

Just call the brand "Pickle Bread".

Cause it's made with dill dough :D

(gotta at least have a joke for a friday. its rough for a lot of us.)

(edit: seriously, tough crowd. hovering between -2 and -4. Like, this is a light-hearted joke. Not even insulting anyone, either.)

Re: The operating cost of adult and gambling startups

#20

Post by raincole » Fri, Apr 24, 2026, 1:24 PM UTC

A_Duck wrote: post #3

What's the author trying to say here? It's good that the law isn't the only line between good and evil. A bit of stigma is a bottom-up way for people to shape society. If nobody invites you to dinner parties because you run a startup that combines payday-lending and day-trading, that's a good thing. It's free alpha for companies doing more worthwhile things.

The article is about payment providers.

Do you think payment providers should act like moral police that decide how the customers can spend their money? If so, do you think Google/Apple/Microsoft should have a say in which apps the users can install? Should ISPs decide which sites the users can access?