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

The Internet Is for Porn

themargins.substack.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

391–400 of 460 posts

Re: The Internet Is for Porn

#391

Post by mu_sub_naught »

neartheplain wrote: post #8

Porn isn't going anywhere. The oldest known depiction of a human figure is pornographic [0]. Since porn will always exist, better that it be produced and consumed in the open, legally speaking. Sex workers deserve the same safety and labor protections as the rest of us. [0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Venus_of_Hohle_Fels

I agree with you that pornography is "not going anywhere". The utility of this media is to increase worker morale and make them more docile and less interested in "the hunt" or "playing the game" of mate discovery/signaling/courting. The mind/body during a viewing session is idled (not going anywhere) - tapping the reptile brain as a shortcut around the ancient accountability driver that is sculpting the self for mate approval & selection (sting of rejection inspires adaptation).

Imagine the need to sneeze but never feeling the release. Backlogged desire for energy exchange nearly satisfied by staring out of a one way mirror (search results, Ex Machina) into an ironic public display of intimacy.

An advanced society is romantic. Leave something to the imagination - construct metaphors to describe the act if it becomes so urgent that it must be advertised.

Sometimes I will hear explicit lyrics allowed to project into public spaces. Are we baboons or humans?

Re: The Internet Is for Porn

#392

Post by ericbarrett »

belorn wrote: post #365
ericbarrett wrote: post #324

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Many have tried; there are a lot of bodies on those hills. Take chargebacks. Not only does the merchant who gets a chargeback lose the money, they're typically hit with a $20-$100 fee on top. It's very common and an old trick to use stolen credit cards, download all the premium content, and redistribute on your own site. Or maybe just because your spouse found the line item on your credit card and you're embarrassed.…

The question, why does not streaming sites for music and video have the problem where someone use a stolen credit cards, download all the premium content, and redistribute on your own site? I would even assume that this is actually happening pretty regularly with different piracy scenes. If you want to rip content with as minimum amount of traceability, identity theft (cc fraud under a different name) would be high o…

My guess: Most porn doesn’t have a mega-studio with mega-lawyers policing huge swaths of the net for violations. Most music and movies do.

Re: The Internet Is for Porn

#393

Post by erklik »

SolarNet wrote: post #244
fullshark wrote: post #44

This guy seems to be operating on the assumption that MEN are to blame for pornography's status as a social pariah. As if mothers everywhere would be proud of their daughters producing pornography on Onlyfans if only their husbands weren't in their ear shaming them.

> This guy seems to be operating on the assumption that MEN are to blame for pornography's status as a social pariah It's called the patriarchy for a reason. I don't know about you, but the priests I see ranting about pornography, the politicians I see talking about regulating it, the police who harass sex workers, people running groups like nofap, so on and so on, are men. Yes of course women also contribute to it.…

>NoFap

How is people recognising that they have a problem and are unhealthily addicted to something somehow a bad thing?

High speed ultra hd pornogrpahy desensitises the mind into looking for constantly more "extreme" content leading to a race to the bottom with many losing desire for the "normal".

There's nothing wrong with that. Putting Porn on this pedestals where it's all good and there's nothing wrong with it is as bad as making it some sort of extreme horrible thing that we must shame and hide. Moderation is good.

Re: The Internet Is for Porn

#394

Post by worik »

pksebben wrote: post #370
Torwald wrote: post #347

Earlier quoted context omitted.

For example in the media. Let's take major newspapers like _The Times_ or the _Frankfurter Allgemeine Zeitung_ as examples. You will not find any article that mentions 2nd amendment rights while not taking side against gun ownership. Every time the American practice is mentioned, it is scoffed at. At least by implication.

Perhaps there's a good reason for that. Not all ideas are created equal, and the proliferation of mass shootings in the states should serve as a strong signal that our gun laws are dumb. Somehow, the conversation has stalled here because some people actually believe they're going to protect their freedoms with violence. You know, by fighting against a government equipped with stealth bombers and death drones and navy…

I have heard that American knife murders are as high, and out of step with other countries, as for gun murders.

Perhaps there is something deeply violent (deeply wrong IMO) in the USA's culture?

Re: The Internet Is for Porn

#395

Post by worik »

watwut wrote: post #117
kodah wrote: post #29

Porn always reminds me of other classical debates that have no end like guns and abortion. The camps of folks in the middle who are cognitively capable of making a difference can't because the outsized voices on either side of them are screaming for either total freedom or total shutdown. They actively fear monger people out of action so no real progress is made. It prevents the best coders and business people from w…

> The camps of folks in the middle who are cognitively capable of making a difference can't because the outsized voices on either side of them are screaming for either total freedom or total shutdown I really don't think this is accurate analysis of abortion debate in USA. First, I am not even sure what difference should the middle require in your analysis. What progress on abortion would you expect to happen had adv…

Women would get the services they need, safely.

Well, duh!

Re: The Internet Is for Porn

#396

Post by novok »

ogre_codes wrote: post #232
kodah wrote: post #29

Porn always reminds me of other classical debates that have no end like guns and abortion. The camps of folks in the middle who are cognitively capable of making a difference can't because the outsized voices on either side of them are screaming for either total freedom or total shutdown. They actively fear monger people out of action so no real progress is made. It prevents the best coders and business people from w…

> My basis for that is that virtually anything sex related, apart from toys, cannot be purchased with credit or debit cards. Hmm, the 3 adult shops I pass on the way into work beg to differ. You can buy anything from lingerie, to lube (with CBD Oil!), videos, handcuffs, ball gags... You can get any of this stuff online too. The only place where you might struggle to use Visa cards for sex is on sites that have been b…

Those are toys

Re: The Internet Is for Porn

#397

Post by novok »

I think OnlyFans growth is partly COVID driven. It's Uber for online sex work. You have a lot of people who are out of work and stuck inside in some aspect and more people stuck in side to consume it. Once a COVID vaccine is widespread this year and as the knowledge that the vast majority of people won't make much from OnlyFans, its revenue rate will go down.

Re: The Internet Is for Porn

#398

Post by novok »

I think this article is a bit duplicitous about why big content platforms purged adult content. This only happened after laws like SESTA / FOSTA got passed and I don't think they really wanted to do it. The porn purge reduced revenues and made services like tumblr even worse off. Before that they didn't really give a shit about it beyond CSAM.

As far as payment companies go, the anti porn stance comes from Visa, Mastercard and Amex and their backing banks, and maybe US govt policy.

If you want porn to have a safe space in the USA, get rid of laws like SESTA / FOSTA and prevent discrimination of payment processing on the basis of sex work. It's the political and finance industry that is ultimately responsible for this.

Also I think if SV was hypothetically female dominated, the anti-sex work attitudes would actually be increased. AFAIK the groups that pushed laws like SESTA or FOSTA were definitely more female led. https://www.vox.com/2016/3/11/11203740/prostitution-legal-me...

Re: The Internet Is for Porn

#399

Post by jtsiskin »

SyzygistSix wrote: post #214
HuwytNashi_002 wrote: post #84

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You're glad that cash-strapped young women are ruining their lives for a new handbag? What prospects do they have for marriage and family after permanently uploading filth to the internet? No high quality man is sticking around after he discovers that bombshell. It has normalised this catastrophic trend. It has eliminated whatever barriers may have been in place. At a societal level, it is degrading and humiliating.…

I find most jobs to be just as degrading and humiliating as being a cam performer, while stealing more time for less money. Venues like OnlyFans also allow people to cut out pimps and other predatory manager types. Truly, puritanism is not dead.

Yeah, construction workers, athletes, etc, are trading their bodies for money. Hell, you could argue some programmers are by sitting 12+ hours. I don’t really see why OnlyFans is any worse

Re: The Internet Is for Porn

#400

Post by [deleted] »

toyg wrote: post #360
hn_throwaway_99 wrote: post #288

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Sure, but the implication that congressional representation should closely track percentage of the population is ludicrous. I mean, according to a quick Google search, nearly 40% of Americans are under age 30, the minimum age for a US Senator . Should we be mad none of them are Senators, or heck, that not one of the nearly a quarter of Americans who are under 18 (aka children) are in Congress?

You are trivializing what is an actual worldwide issue: even in democratic countries the young are completely not represented. Not “underrepresented”, not represented at all . It’s a massive, massive problem that very few countries actually tried to tackle. The young are the future, but governments can (and mostly do) completely ignore their needs, and simply run everything into the metaphorical ground - they’ll be g…

[deleted]
Post reply on HN