Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Under the skin of OnlyFans

bbc.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

141–150 of 615 posts

Re: Under the skin of OnlyFans

#141

Post by thinkingemote »

ryandrake wrote: post #28
650REDHAIR wrote: post #20

So our kids are getting older so I've been paying more attention to popular social networks and it's wild how many YouTubers, Twitch'ers, TikTok'ers, Instagram'ers have OF content directly linked from their non-porn bios. I don't like it, but I'm not sure what a good solution is. I mean, people are free to do what they'd like, but it's hard to police screen time 100% of the time and their peer group has a lot more ac…

I don't know--as I get older, and see things like this, I can't help but think maybe I'm just turning into an out-of-touch old fart. Maybe norms are simply changing and the next generations are building a better world free of all these stupid taboos and hangups. My ol' grandpa looked at my generation and just didn't understand how we were OK with things like interracial marriage, same sex relationships, drug legaliza…

With this logic the following generations will also be perplexed at a changing world that has lost all barriers and controls.

Every generation will be forever perplexed as every year the world changes. continuously. The old ways will continuously be outdated. It's literally limitless as limits are removed.

What type of things do you think our kids will be puzzled about in the future? Where is the world headed?

For many people around the world they do not see the world headed in a positive direction as morality goes, and wisdom from past generations is dismissed. For many others they see it as a great thing, a libertarian paradise where anything is possible!

Re: Under the skin of OnlyFans

#142

Post by jtolmar »

quenix wrote: post #138
simonebrunozzi wrote: post #101

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> there were about 20K active content creators). The average monthly payment was $5000 20k times $5,000 = $100M/month. Still quite impressive.

… heavily skewed by the top 5%. So the number is likely way, way lower than $100M (perhaps $8-10M?)

It's an average, so the skew doesn't matter for this.

Average = sum / count. Multiply both sides by count. Sum = count * average.

Re: Under the skin of OnlyFans

#143

Post by brazzy »

tinco wrote: post #122
brazzy wrote: post #117

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> A lot of sex workers overtly reinforce social behaviors towards women (sexualization and objectification among other things) in order to appeal to men, which hurts them in the long run. This is something that's really been bugging me when looking at Reddit's porn subs. There has been a really noticeable change in the last 2 years. Back then, a majority of the posters seemed to actually be amateurs getting their kic…

The titles on sites like pornhub are a lot worse. Sometimes I feel like they're automatically generated or something, with weird sexual fantasies that aren't even remotely in the video. It's become a bit of a meme, and it certainly has always been present but for example the incest stuff, it's just disturbing to me to the point where I greatly prefer browsing on Reddit just because the titles are more tame. Another c…

> The titles on sites like pornhub are a lot worse.

I don't agree. Even the most misogynistic stuff there doesn't actively try to draw in the viewer to the same degree, and most importantly, it allows the women a much clearer separation of what they're doing before the camera and who they really are. They don't have to advertise it and tell random strangers "you can have that too!".

Re: Under the skin of OnlyFans

#144

Post by strogonoff »

jedberg wrote: post #106
happyweasel wrote: post #86

Aren't OnlyFans (and similar companies) another way to launder money?

You can easily launder money through any two sided market. OF is no different in that regard.

In normal two-sided markets goods or services are being exchanged, making it feasible to check whether the price paid reflects reality in any way.

On the other hand, it is very difficult to prove that someone is faking being a fan, so laundering can be as easy as giving a friend N dollars of suspect cash or cryptocurrency and having them pay you N minus the hassle fee through Twitch/OnlyFans/etc. from their credit card.

Re: Under the skin of OnlyFans

#145

Post by quenix »

alpaca128 wrote: post #116
shadilay wrote: post #93

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That's why you need hardware. eg Pluton

No hardware or software can prevent copying of content. If something is visible on a screen or audible on a speaker you can copy and redistribute it without restrictions. It's only a bit trickier with video games because those actually need to stay in their original format to be useful, and may use DRM, but so far that didn't stop people either.

For those interested, a formalisation of this problem: the "Analog Hole" [0].

[0]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Analog_hole

Re: Under the skin of OnlyFans

#146

Post by krzrak »

thinkingemote wrote: post #136
650REDHAIR wrote: post #20

So our kids are getting older so I've been paying more attention to popular social networks and it's wild how many YouTubers, Twitch'ers, TikTok'ers, Instagram'ers have OF content directly linked from their non-porn bios. I don't like it, but I'm not sure what a good solution is. I mean, people are free to do what they'd like, but it's hard to police screen time 100% of the time and their peer group has a lot more ac…

>people are free to do what they'd like Your post seems to suggest you would not be happy for your kids to do what they like when they get older. Often people seem to be happy for other peoples children to do what they like but not theirs. To me this seems like the wrong attitude towards ones neighbours. There's 2 options therefore, for me, if I am honest with my family: disapprove of porn as a life choice or approve…

> Often people seem to be happy for other peoples children to do what they like but not theirs. To me this seems like the wrong attitude towards ones neighbours.

I think you miss the important concept, that people can have different world views and different things might be acceptable to them. So I may not approve my kids/family/myself doing something, living some kind of lifestyle, but I accept that there are people who have different values and it's OK for me (as long as it doesn't infringe my freedom, of course).

Otherwise, we have religious fundamentalism.

Re: Under the skin of OnlyFans

#147

Post by oceanghost »

throwmeawaydddy wrote: post #127
oceanghost wrote: post #111

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Very interesting. There are so many things Id like to say. c) Was this done as blackmail? There is a somewhat common dating site scam where someone gets you to friend them on FB, and then to sext with them-- then they threaten to send the material to your FB friends. I'd imagine OF girls would almost be a captive audience for this. --- While I find OF personally distasteful, I realize that I paid for sex the old fash…

> c) Was this done as blackmail? There is a somewhat common dating site scam where someone gets you to friend them on FB, and then to sext with them-- then they threaten to send the material to your FB friends. I'd imagine OF girls would almost be a captive audience for this. No, it wasn't blackmail. The creator never received any messages from the fan that went nuclear (they only know it was a 'fan' since they had t…

Thank you for the thoughtful reply.

A childhood friend I had turned out to be one of the "crazy stalker" type individuals. I do not know what psychologically leads to this position, but I do know his family was very dysfunctional. I cut him off as a friend when he had a blowup because he discovered his g/f was also dating another friend of ours, and he went to the guys house to beat him up.

So, 20 years later I'm reading the local Facebook feed, and some poor woman has posted this crazy guy she met at a bar was sending her death threats and stalking her and the police were looking for him. And yea, it's my former friend. I replied that I had known him previously and hoped this was all a misunderstanding, but I'd be happy to talk to the police if needed.

And then the sardonic moment: numerous women replied saying, "Yea, he stalked me too." Including one gal I was fairly close to.

My point is only-- mental illness sucks and is widespread. I can see by some twisted logic he felt that stalking this woman was sort of, doing the work in the relationship, being devoted to her, and then being angry when she wasn't returning his affections, and somehow thinking that anger, would get her to fall in line.

I think OF invites these types of creeps and while unfortunate, it should not be unexpected.

Re: Under the skin of OnlyFans

#148

Post by 55555 »

KirillPanov wrote: post #123
somedude895 wrote: post #80

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> The average monthly payment was $5000 (skewed massively by the top 5%). I used to work in the direct carrier billing department of a large telco and I'm still amazed by the phenomenon of whales. We'd get 98% of people spending 20 bucks on Spotify and the odd app here and there, and then there were people who would consistently spend 15k+ on Candy Crush (and pay their bills). Not the same level as what you're talkin…

> people who would consistently spend 15k+ on Candy Crush (and pay their bills). Sounds like a very successful money laundering operation.

It isn't. This is normal in mobile games.

Re: Under the skin of OnlyFans

#149

Post by rorykoehler »

elevenoh wrote: post #124
rorykoehler wrote: post #51

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think I sit in the middle on this. I don't think it is evil but if you dig under the surface a little you will find a lot of trauma, anxiety and desperation whether it is narcissistic instagram posts or OF style porn.

Yeah, I also think this is an expression of a natural human feeling that'd exist whether the technology is there or not.

Beer and whiskey both have alcohol in them but try drinking 1 litre of whiskey every day and see where you end up.

Re: Under the skin of OnlyFans

#150

Post by LdSGSgvupDV »

SilverRed wrote: post #45
650REDHAIR wrote: post #20

So our kids are getting older so I've been paying more attention to popular social networks and it's wild how many YouTubers, Twitch'ers, TikTok'ers, Instagram'ers have OF content directly linked from their non-porn bios. I don't like it, but I'm not sure what a good solution is. I mean, people are free to do what they'd like, but it's hard to police screen time 100% of the time and their peer group has a lot more ac…

Have you considered the alternative that this is not an evil which you are unable to control but just another way of living / thinking of sexual content? There is nothing inherently evil about this stuff so why is it terrible that it is becoming more accepted/common? If in 30 years we live in a society where people post nudes like they do facebook posts, is there anything wrong about this? Could you describe the harm…

Maybe birth rate would drop faster than before?
Post reply on HN