The real OnlyFans scandal is the unaccountable power of platforms and banks • Hacker News Board

Re: The real OnlyFans scandal is the unaccountable power of platforms and banks

#161

Post by luckylion » Sat, Aug 28, 2021, 2:16 PM UTC

vidarh wrote: post #129

bufferoverflow wrote: post #81

It's interesting to see the comments from people who supported Youtube/Twitter/FB/Patreon/Visa political censorship, but are suddenly against the porn censorship by the payment same systems. "Rules for thee, but not for me."

There is a difference between a platform that can be easily replaced choosing not to serve certain content, and infrastructure providers choosing to deny service. I'm all for Twitter choosing what they will allow - if anything the more aggressive they are, the more space it creates for competition. I'm on the other hand not for payment providers even being allowed to choose, because their position then makes them eff…

In this case, OnlyFans made the choice (and reversed it), not the payment provider. Granted, they did it because of the payment provider, but Twitter etc don't make their decisions in a vacuum either, they react to different kinds of pressure.

That said, the same people made the same arguments ("private businesses, no rules should apply") with payment providers boycotting Gab, but turn around now. Will they learn that political pressure via businesses is a bad idea because it might affect them next? Doubtful, they haven't learned it the first few times.

Re: The real OnlyFans scandal is the unaccountable power of platforms and banks

#162

Post by BiteCode_dev » Sat, Aug 28, 2021, 2:16 PM UTC

TeMPOraL wrote: post #117

There's this common meme of blaming anti-sex-work sentiment on some bloc of US Evangelicals who secretly rule the Western economy and politics. Because surely, it couldn't be the market speaking out against adult material? Here's an alternative hypothesis: between those anti-sex fundamentalist religious groups (Christian or otherwise) and people who absolutely love everything sex-related, there's the vast majority of…

The market also leads to food full of fat and sugar. Without strong campaigns against cigarettes, the market would make sure it's everywhere. The market also has no problem showing deeply violent content to children.

At some point, the status quo was slavery, death penalty, child work, women domination and against gays.

Just because if you do nothing the current equilibrium tends in some direction doesn't mean it's the right thing to do.

Re: The real OnlyFans scandal is the unaccountable power of platforms and banks

#163

Post by 1MachineElf » Sat, Aug 28, 2021, 2:17 PM UTC

FranksTV wrote: post #119

1MachineElf wrote: post #114

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Calling on people to storm the capitol and over throw democracy isn't the same as protesting politicians who refuse to take allegations of election tampering seriously, and yet people with censorship powers keep insisting that the former is what January 6th was about.

There is no credible evidence. Its an insane conspiracy theory. There were many, many lawsuits all of which were heard in court and ruled on.

>There were many, many lawsuits all of which were heard in court and ruled on.

No. Most of those lawsuits were thrown out without rulings. Generally, not enough process was given to investigate these allegations, which is why half the country supported Trump on Jan 6 until things got violent and moderates got cold feet.

Re: The real OnlyFans scandal is the unaccountable power of platforms and banks

#164

Post by literallyaduck » Sat, Aug 28, 2021, 2:19 PM UTC

sk55 wrote: post #140

OrvalWintermute wrote: post #120

Earlier quoted context omitted.

While I am concerned about the coercive power of these platforms against speech they find unpopular, whether porn, or something else.... > A girl pleasuring herself isn’t the same thing as encouraging people to storm the White House and overthrow democracy Enough with the hyperbole, the FBI has already stated they found little evidence of a grand conspiracy to overthrow the govt [1], despite the fact we know that the…

From the article you linked, there was clearly coordinated groups trying to overtake: >The officials did note that far-right groups – like the Oath Keepers, Proud Boys, and Three Percenters – may have collaborated in breaching the Capitol on the day of the riot. These aren't scrubs either. Some of them are ex-military, armed civilians coordinating with other groups to breach the capitol and take hostages. This is not…

If they didn't bring guns and open carry it wasn't a real revolution or they were really stupid either way they weren't storming the white house it was congress and the FBI was involved heavily with the events so you could say it was government sponsored.

Re: The real OnlyFans scandal is the unaccountable power of platforms and banks

#165

Post by OrvalWintermute » Sat, Aug 28, 2021, 2:19 PM UTC

TeMPOraL wrote: post #117

There's this common meme of blaming anti-sex-work sentiment on some bloc of US Evangelicals who secretly rule the Western economy and politics. Because surely, it couldn't be the market speaking out against adult material? Here's an alternative hypothesis: between those anti-sex fundamentalist religious groups (Christian or otherwise) and people who absolutely love everything sex-related, there's the vast majority of…

> There's this common meme of blaming anti-sex-work sentiment on some bloc of US Evangelicals who secretly rule the Western economy and politics. Because surely, it couldn't be the market speaking out against adult material?

Strangely, the same evangelicals that are being allegedly discriminated against, and de-platformed [1], and their right-wing jewish allies [2] are also the same evangelicals that are controlling the big platforms, and through NCOSE, creating a pressure campaign [3] to form porn removal? That the Right Wing is executing this, and controlling this, for anti-porn? [4]

I don't think this is particularly credible, but I did include [3] & [4] for the contrary perspective.

A more realistic answer is that Nicholas Kristof, a well-known NYTimes reporter and author, wrote an interesting piece on Pornhub that also indicting several others for rebroadcasting non-consensual sex videos [5]. This led to pressure on the market in general around payment processors handling things of less repute because of #MeToo

> The market caters to majority case. Advertisers, especially, cater to majority. In such hypothetical world (which I posit might just be the real one), the market itself will exert pressure against overt pornography and sex work, and anything that associates itself with it.

Well said.

If the era of #MeToo has taught us anything, it should be that one person's sexual freedom to make a buck is another's sexual coercion and exploitation. In the grey between those two truths there will be casualties.

[1] https://www.breitbart.com/tech/2019/02/27/financial-blacklis...

[2] https://www.frontpagemag.com/point/2021/03/visa-finally-gets...

[3] https://slate.com/human-interest/2021/08/conservative-christ...

[4] https://www.nytimes.com/2021/08/24/opinion/onlyfans-porn-sex...

[5] https://www.nytimes.com/2020/12/04/opinion/sunday/pornhub-ra...

Re: The real OnlyFans scandal is the unaccountable power of platforms and banks

#166

Post by the_gipsy » Sat, Aug 28, 2021, 2:20 PM UTC

FranksTV wrote: post #130

ashtonkem wrote: post #51

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The issue is that the banks all move in lock step, undermining the basic principle of the free market. If one bank decides it doesn’t want to deal with porn, fine. But when all the banks decide that, that’s very very bad. The cumulative effect is a chilling of protected speech in a way that congress could never legally get away with.

I mean, if it's really a great market that's underserved, then you should launch a payment processor that serves the market. People think this is about morality, but it's a lot more about the cost of operating in that market. I bet that there are way more claims of fraud, money laundering investigations, subpoenas and other overhead that the banks don't want to deal with. Like teenagers stealing credit cards to pay c…

> if it's really a great market that's underserved, then you should launch a payment processor that serves the market.

A credit card for porn… good luck.

Re: The real OnlyFans scandal is the unaccountable power of platforms and banks

#167

Post by TeMPOraL » Sat, Aug 28, 2021, 2:20 PM UTC

alfiedotwtf wrote: post #148

TeMPOraL wrote: post #117

There's this common meme of blaming anti-sex-work sentiment on some bloc of US Evangelicals who secretly rule the Western economy and politics. Because surely, it couldn't be the market speaking out against adult material? Here's an alternative hypothesis: between those anti-sex fundamentalist religious groups (Christian or otherwise) and people who absolutely love everything sex-related, there's the vast majority of…

> people who find the whole topic uncomfortable to a large degree ... they don't like being reminded of it. They don't like sex being mixed with other areas of life. So... ban it for everyone else because they don't like it? Sounds fair and reasonable /s

It's more subtle than that. There's a reason I mentioned advertisers :).

The group I posit is the majority are the people who:

- Will want to hide their sexual services related habits from others, including their spouses (who may also do the same!). Those are the people who cause chargeback risks for sex businesses, making the latter undesirable for payment processors that are optimizing for majority use case. This is reflected in payment processing fees.

- Will dislike products and companies who use overtly sexual messaging or associate themselves with sex work, but themselves are in business other than sex works. Advertising industry is exerting pressure against sexual topics in order to not lose access to these people('s wallets). This means that any non-sex, ad-funded business faces tremendous market pressure to stay away from topics pertaining to sex.

- Will be highly responsible to messaging that porn/sex work is dangerous to people's minds/souls, or their children, or society. They may not agitate and organize against sex business, but when presented with pro- and anti- options (and enough propaganda), they'll vote against.

There's no need for any conspiracy, or any large-scale organizing here. It's just how the political and economical incentive gradient looks.

Re: The real OnlyFans scandal is the unaccountable power of platforms and banks

#168

Post by lucaspm98 » Sat, Aug 28, 2021, 2:21 PM UTC

pjc50 wrote: post #52

whythre wrote: post #47

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I mean, ‘the Patriarchy’ is the old chestnut explanation for most societal ills. Any evidence that it was corrupt old white men? The banks are bowing to external pressure and I am not convinced those voices are the ones necessarily representative of ‘the Patriarchy.’

The external pressure in the US is coming mostly from evangelical Christians, who literally worship the divine Father figure.

The policies around payment processing for the adult industry do not stem from puritanical values. It’s a business decision around the astronomically high chargeback rates for credit card purchases of this content.

Re: The real OnlyFans scandal is the unaccountable power of platforms and banks

#169

Post by isthisreality » Sat, Aug 28, 2021, 2:21 PM UTC

vidarh wrote: post #129

bufferoverflow wrote: post #81

It's interesting to see the comments from people who supported Youtube/Twitter/FB/Patreon/Visa political censorship, but are suddenly against the porn censorship by the payment same systems. "Rules for thee, but not for me."

There is a difference between a platform that can be easily replaced choosing not to serve certain content, and infrastructure providers choosing to deny service. I'm all for Twitter choosing what they will allow - if anything the more aggressive they are, the more space it creates for competition. I'm on the other hand not for payment providers even being allowed to choose, because their position then makes them eff…

> the more aggressive they are, the more space it creates for competition

The competition is not apples to apples. Instead, you have ideological bubbles like Gab, and you have the incumbent network (Twitter) which "normies" use by default.

The problem with the default network applying ideological censorship is that it limits the average person's exposure to the marketplace of ideas. In the context of a controversial topic, this benefits the default narrative tremendously.

If we want to reduce ideological conflict, it's imperative to respect alternative viewpoints and engage them as equals. Otherwise, we risk alienating people into becoming extremists, or worse, we allow the authorities (who work closely with censors and fact checkers) to control the Overton window and propagandize us away from the truth.

Re: The real OnlyFans scandal is the unaccountable power of platforms and banks

#170

Post by einpoklum » Sat, Aug 28, 2021, 2:22 PM UTC

ashtonkem wrote: post #51

pessimizer wrote: post #25

The reason the banks, and through the banks OnlyFans, attack sex is because they are accountable, and don't wish to take risks unless they are very profitable risks. The real danger of platforms and banks is how happy they are to censor for the government, or simply the loudest, richest mouth, in order to keep the profit flowing. If you want to fix it, you put in legal protections for people to do business, rather th…

The issue is that the banks all move in lock step, undermining the basic principle of the free market. If one bank decides it doesn’t want to deal with porn, fine. But when all the banks decide that, that’s very very bad. The cumulative effect is a chilling of protected speech in a way that congress could never legally get away with.

> If one bank decides it doesn’t want to deal with porn, fine.

Not necessarily. Banks have a government license to create money (ok, depends on what kind of bank, but let's put that aside), and provide services many individuals and organizations rely on. That already means that even if you're a staunch capitalist, you should still support some sort of set of constraints and norms, regulation, of their activities. So it's not clear that a bank should be able to refuse service to legally-operating organizations.

Plus, if one bank can do this, then why not any other bank?