Live data from Hacker News

Under the skin of OnlyFans

bbc.com

21–30 of 615 posts

Re: Under the skin of OnlyFans

#21
post #5

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> OnlyFans is much less so due to the very nature of its product and who its content creators are. This is an extremely generous view. It's well known that cam sites often feature trafficked victims. Why wouldn't you also assume that an OnlyFans is also run by a trafficker? You cited yourself that the industry is predatory and exploitative. Do you honestly believe that most of these woman truly made this choice thems…

Earn, (which was acquired by Coinbase and shutdown/rebranded), did the same thing as OnlyFans, charging for direct messages. There are many services like that. Many content producers on OnlyFans switch away from subscription model to just freemium with paid direct messages. It is unnecessarily gendered to treat OnlyFans differently just because the many content creators on OnlyFans are women leading with their bodies…

>It requires pure misogyny to treat OnlyFans differently just because the content creators on OnlyFans are women leading with their bodies

So if we took misogyny out of the equation no one would think OnlyFans favors attractive women?

Re: Under the skin of OnlyFans

#22
post #3

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'd love for you to expand on that opinion. In some ways I think it's a good product that gives some measure of control (and a _lot_ of the money) back to the people who star in and create pornographic content. The existing industry is exploitative and predatory, and from my admittedly not-very-well-versed vantage point, OnlyFans is much less so due to the very nature of its product and who its content creators are.

Not OP, but IMO onlyfans is especially predatory because it makes it look easy to trade nudes for large amounts of cash. In reality very few people are going to be making above minimum wage, onlyfans is just like the rest of social media - a lottery that pays millions to a few winners and asks all the other participants to create content for next-to-nothing just to enter the lotto.

How does that make it predatory, is there an upfront fee or debt? Or is it just the nude content being posted that makes it predatory from your view? It was not clear to me.

Re: Under the skin of OnlyFans

#23
post #8
post #5

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> OnlyFans is much less so due to the very nature of its product and who its content creators are. This is an extremely generous view. It's well known that cam sites often feature trafficked victims. Why wouldn't you also assume that an OnlyFans is also run by a trafficker? You cited yourself that the industry is predatory and exploitative. Do you honestly believe that most of these woman truly made this choice thems…

On one hand not requiring to go through a studio would make it easier for trafficking, but porn studios don't exactly have a fantastic track record when it comes to human rights. On the other hand for individual content makers using this platform gives them far more control over the type of content they produce and a fairer share of the profit.

You've summed up my opinion entirely in two sentences haha, well done. That's why my original comment was prefaced with "in some ways".

Re: Under the skin of OnlyFans

#24
If moderation scaled, most of these discussions would be moot.

The most common route is some automation and outsourcing. Although the typical outsourcer may simply not be able to take on only fans content.

Re: Under the skin of OnlyFans

#25
post #6
post #3

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'd love for you to expand on that opinion. In some ways I think it's a good product that gives some measure of control (and a _lot_ of the money) back to the people who star in and create pornographic content. The existing industry is exploitative and predatory, and from my admittedly not-very-well-versed vantage point, OnlyFans is much less so due to the very nature of its product and who its content creators are.

Doesn't seem to be the case: https://mobile.twitter.com/aella_girl/status/133572526734025... Has MLM level distribution where only the top 2% or so make anything of consequence.

That doesn't really disagree with anything I wrote. I was mainly implicitly comparing it to "regular" pornography and cam-sites. The latter take huge percentages comparatively, and the former don't give percentages to most of their performers at all.

Re: Under the skin of OnlyFans

#26

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…

Related, it sucks that so much content nowadays is just a thinly veiled advertisement for OF pages.

Re: Under the skin of OnlyFans

#27
The overlap between small-time OnlyFans creators and people hypervigilant about their privacy feels small. Streamers and idols have faced this problem for some time - with cases of people finding out where a streamer lives based on minutiae like reflections - but add porn and inexperience to the equation and it's not at all surprising that stalking behavior can get dangerously extreme.

Storytime - a girl at my uni mentioned in our school's subreddit that she does OnlyFans. She made the comment from the same reddit account she used to advertise her profile and she also wrote many regular SFW comments and posts. So... she was pretty hot, and me being a horny and curious college dude, I tried to see if I could casually ID them.

Yes, kind of creepy, I know. Horniness aside, the point is, it took me like 10 minutes to find their real name and identity, based only on information they decided it would be safe to publicly associate with themselves. Rest assured, I didn't do anything with that knowledge and I have no intention of ever doing so, obviously. Really big school, completely different majors that spend time in completely different parts of campus, I doubt I'd even notice if I ever crossed paths with them.

People who aren't techies who always have privacy on the mind often drastically underestimate how little information is needed to uniquely ID them. In this case, a) she posted in a specific school sub, b) she posted about her grades in a major-specific class, c) she mentioned her ethnicity in a regular SFW post, and d) she shared plenty of pictures of her body sans face from a variety of angles.

Well now I can know that there's an X-ethnicity person in Y grade of Z major at ABC university who has an identifying tattoo and a relatively uncommon hairstyle... Literally 2 or 3 Google searches later and I had a result. As I'm sure is often the case, she wasn't particularly concerned about the privacy of her regular, real life identity, presumably with the assumption that it wouldn't ever be connected to her OnlyFans. Name on school project websites, articles in the school newspaper, LinkedIns, public instagrams, things like that.

It doesn't take long to scroll through google images and recognize a body. And that's probably what's unintuitive about this risk - someone might think "well there are another 300 people who fit that description, so I'm good". But with computers, it's trivial to look through 300 people. Someone crazy enough could easily sift through 3000 pictures searching for you. They know roughly what you look like. And if the number of people fitting your description is only around 30, it's hard to even call that a search - a few seconds on a page or two is all it takes to ID you.

The good thing is that the vast majority of people are probably harmless. The occasional overly curious person like me might cross some boundaries and find out who you are, but it's not likely they'll have any desire to contact you in any way. The bad thing, of course, is that it only takes 1 nutcase to instill a lot of fear.

I don't think there's a solution other than more education - assuming this kind of content creation continues to exist without heavy regulation. Maybe OnlyFans could play a part. I'm sure most OF creators vaguely know the risks, but they may not be used to thinking carefully about sharing seemingly innocuous and vague details. Like, "Did you know you might be stalked? Yes. Did you know you might be stalked and identified if you share a picture of your dog at the park? Uh, what!?".

A quick 15 minute video on protecting yourself from the crazies could probably prevent a lot of dangerous situations. "Don't share your school or major", "Don't take pictures near street signs or stores", "Don't wear jewelry you usually wear", etc.

Re: Under the skin of OnlyFans

#28

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 legalization, etc. He resigned himself to the fact that he was just getting old and inflexible and the world was changing out from under him. Maybe the same thing is happening to us, now.

Re: Under the skin of OnlyFans

#29
post #17

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Not OP, but IMO onlyfans is especially predatory because it makes it look easy to trade nudes for large amounts of cash. In reality very few people are going to be making above minimum wage, onlyfans is just like the rest of social media - a lottery that pays millions to a few winners and asks all the other participants to create content for next-to-nothing just to enter the lotto.

> onlyfans is especially predatory if this is what you call predatory, then why isn't sports stars and film/music celebrity culture not predatory in the same way? I don't see the difference. I say let people do what they want, as long as they understand what they're doing and is informed of the (potential) consequences.

People do say that about the music industry. Ask Kesha or Britney!

Re: Under the skin of OnlyFans

#30
post #17

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Not OP, but IMO onlyfans is especially predatory because it makes it look easy to trade nudes for large amounts of cash. In reality very few people are going to be making above minimum wage, onlyfans is just like the rest of social media - a lottery that pays millions to a few winners and asks all the other participants to create content for next-to-nothing just to enter the lotto.

> onlyfans is especially predatory if this is what you call predatory, then why isn't sports stars and film/music celebrity culture not predatory in the same way? I don't see the difference. I say let people do what they want, as long as they understand what they're doing and is informed of the (potential) consequences.

Sports is predatory, see the NCAA monopoly. Music was well known in the last century for predatory contracts. People like Harvey Weinstein and Kevin Spacey from the film industry are often called predators, and the casting couch is legendary. Celebrity culture is highly predatory with obsessive fans and stalker paparazzi.

You’re right, no real difference.

Post reply on HN