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

Breaking Down OnlyFans' Economics

matthewball.co

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

451–460 of 878 posts

Re: Breaking Down OnlyFans' Economics

#451

Post by GreenWatermelon »

benterix wrote: post #317
broken-kebab wrote: post #234

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Those rules aren't taken from the thin air though. It's really easy to argue that sexual gedonism is detrimental to society, and its online incarnation is even more so: as any addiction it steals productive time from people's lives, it puts hormones over culture which patently breeds violence, it leads to social atomization, and consequently to mental issues (which means violence again), economically bad on a level c…

> as any addiction it steals productive time from people's lives, it leads to social atomization, and consequently to mental issues (which means violence again), economically bad on a level comparable to fentanyl imports, and the list goes on. Well the same could be said of social media, mobile phones, netflix binge, computer games (although I don't agree with the violence part). So why single out sex then?

Straw man. No one singled anything out, this thread is specifically talking about one topic. In many other threads you'll find people discussing the extreme negative consequences of social media.

Re: Breaking Down OnlyFans' Economics

#452

Post by vunderba »

RandomThoughts3 wrote: post #242

What I find fascinating/disturbing with OnlyFans and in some way with Twitch and streaming in general is more the client side than the creators. Here are basically people paying, and paying a lot, for parasocial relationships. Because clearly it’s not about the content per see which is a dim a dozen and available for free in trove. I think it says something quite dark about our society as a whole that we have basical…

Although Onlyfans is certainly more exploitative, I would argue that this concept of one-way parasocial relationships has existed since basically the dawn of humanity and likely has roots to our earliest fundamental tribalistic nature.

I mean look at the extremely popular K-pop bands, fans get insanely invested into these groups, following them, bringing glowsticks to show support, etc. Or the entire Japanese idol movement for that matter.

Or think about how people stand in line for hours just to get the signature of somebody at a convention.

I think this is just the way a lot of people are wired. I don't know if it's bad or a good thing, it's just something I've noticed.

Re: Breaking Down OnlyFans' Economics

#453

Post by nullstyle »

pfannkuchen wrote: post #402
makeitdouble wrote: post #389

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm not sure I follow, how is listening to music performed by another human live different from watching another human performing a sexy act live ? The analog to actually having sex would be playing with the band on the stage.

Fair point. The reason I don’t think only playing with the band counts is: in a hunter gather tribe 70,000 years ago, did everyone sing all of the songs all of the time? Or did some people just listen, at least some of the time? Practically speaking I think it must have been the latter. Of course there are lots of unnatural aspects in live music still, like too many people, too loud, etc. But recorded music is wholly…

> Practically speaking I think it must have been the latter.

This assumes music was made as a performance. Music can be (and i argue probably mostly was) people jamming together. Musician and audience are blurred in this scenario.

Re: Breaking Down OnlyFans' Economics

#455

Post by prox »

darepublic wrote: post #338

> Usually, such a ban would destroy a media platforms’ business model, but browser-based experiences are fine for viewing photos and videos and sending messages (in contrast, most games can’t even run). And while apps tend to offer better user experiences and far simpler payment processes, most OnlyFans customers aren’t dissuaded by the need to use a browser, nor the extra hoops involved in manually entering a credit…

Yeah, browsers to me represent freedom against locked in/tracking of apps. I rejoice browsers every day.

Re: Breaking Down OnlyFans' Economics

#456

Post by qingcharles »

RandomThoughts3 wrote: post #242

What I find fascinating/disturbing with OnlyFans and in some way with Twitch and streaming in general is more the client side than the creators. Here are basically people paying, and paying a lot, for parasocial relationships. Because clearly it’s not about the content per see which is a dim a dozen and available for free in trove. I think it says something quite dark about our society as a whole that we have basical…

This view isn't matched by the stats. I have a friend who is a successful OF model and only a fraction of one percent of her subscribers ever DM her. A lot of them subscribe, see what they want and then immediately delete their accounts. There's no apparent relationship between her fans and her, for the most part.

Re: Breaking Down OnlyFans' Economics

#457

Post by zug_zug »

vunderba wrote: post #452
RandomThoughts3 wrote: post #242

What I find fascinating/disturbing with OnlyFans and in some way with Twitch and streaming in general is more the client side than the creators. Here are basically people paying, and paying a lot, for parasocial relationships. Because clearly it’s not about the content per see which is a dim a dozen and available for free in trove. I think it says something quite dark about our society as a whole that we have basical…

Although Onlyfans is certainly more exploitative, I would argue that this concept of one-way parasocial relationships has existed since basically the dawn of humanity and likely has roots to our earliest fundamental tribalistic nature. I mean look at the extremely popular K-pop bands, fans get insanely invested into these groups, following them, bringing glowsticks to show support, etc. Or the entire Japanese idol mo…

I agree.

I do remember a study that people often think label their more popular friends as their "best" friends, but if you go ask THOSE friends, they label THEIR even more popular friends as their "BEST" friends. It's often asymmetrical.

Though tbh going too far down these rabbitholes usually isn't healthy/productive imo.

Re: Breaking Down OnlyFans' Economics

#458

Post by beaglesss »

habinero wrote: post #411
beaglesss wrote: post #196

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>lot of men haven't realized the era of the provider is over and dead, and they're now optional. Cool, child support and alimony optional now. Right? Because it's always easy to be independent with OPM. People forget single moms became far more practiced after the state incentivized breaking up families.

Why does that matter if they don't marry anyone? They control the means of reproduction, after all.

Whether they have a marriage certificate might not matter, but the stats are clear that children raised by single moms are correlated with a lot of bad outcomes including far more likely to end up victims of the prison industrial complex. If you only give a shit about yourself and not your offspring, maybe that doesn't matter

Re: Breaking Down OnlyFans' Economics

#459

Post by renewiltord »

71bw wrote: post #117
renewiltord wrote: post #102

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yeah but Rick Rubin is always involved and Max Martin has written a hell of a lot of megahits. Makes you think.

>Rick Rubin Dear God, I've looked into his discography[1] and nearly every album I think of as great from the last 30 years is there. Seasons in the Abyss, The Life of Pablo, 99 Problems, SOAD self-titled + Toxicity, The Geto Boys self-titled, Licensed to Ill... Is this man a hit printer or something? Really shows that Metallica went to him with Death Magnetic after the joke called St. Anger lol [1] https://en.wikipe…

There's a great interview he's got with Anderson Cooper. A fantastic line from it is "I have no technical ability whatsoever". What a guy. Seemed quite likeable.

Re: Breaking Down OnlyFans' Economics

#460

Post by greenie_beans »

GaryNumanVevo wrote: post #282
greenie_beans wrote: post #265

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Context: I have a side business deploying chat LLMs for OnlyFans models for fans to "talk" to that's currently at 65k/MRR. good job

This is hackernews after all!

would be hilarious if you were THE gary numan. why tf you making SaaS income? i would not be anywhere near tech if my art was successful.
Post reply on HN