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

481–490 of 878 posts

Re: Breaking Down OnlyFans' Economics

#481

Post by alt227 »

hungie wrote: post #378
lynx23 wrote: post #138

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Er, yes. Without a question. Would you date an ex-prostitue?

If we connected, why not? I guess I'd make sure we both had clean sti panels before engaging in sex, but I'd do that with any partner. "They used their dick or vagina to make money" is not any different to me than "they used their brain or hands to make money".

Thats a fine opinion, and I fully agree with you.

However its slightly different to the discussed point here, which is that people who use their dick or vagina to make money publicly can later have that used against them.

Theres nothing wrong with dating a sex worker, but when you want to make them a wife and have children, there becomes a risk that some crazy drug addict is going to spot them in the future and do something. Mabye they are going to call out to your wife while she is dropping the kids off at school. Maybe they will be a bit more sinister and threaten to send old OF videos to your kids ands kids teachers email address unless you give them some money, or do it again etc.

These are of course hypotheticals, but they have happened in the past and it is a risk, however small, of having an ex sex worker as a life partner.

Re: Breaking Down OnlyFans' Economics

#482

Post by ehnto »

qingcharles wrote: post #456
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.

Parasocial relationships don't require interaction, you could just watch a twitch streamer a lot. I think if we defined it by requiring interaction we would underestimate the percieved impact of these social phenomenon.

Re: Breaking Down OnlyFans' Economics

#483

Post by lotsofpulp »

ath3nd wrote: post #462
lotsofpulp wrote: post #243

Earlier quoted context omitted.

ath3nd did not write same social status, they wrote socially acceptable. Relevant username, I guess.

I guess I meant a bit of both. We don't give high social status to killers, thugs, murderers and hired assassins, but when it's institutionalized killing, (which is the military) that's okay? The fact that an "official" gives the word, and the victims are not citizens of your country doesn't make the military be less about killing. There also is nothing "productive" about paying for salaries, equipment and training t…

> There also is nothing "productive" about paying for salaries, equipment and training to a bunch of grown men in the anticipation that you have to send them to do violence to your bidding.

I disagree. First and only rule of nature is might makes right, and being capable of dishing out the most violence (and hence also least likely to be the victim of it) is very “productive”. It is a huge contributor to the purchasing power of the US dollar, which is a referendum on the stability and productivity of US society.

For example, the oceanic transportation routes around the world are kept mostly safe and humming along because of militaries enforcing it.

Re: Breaking Down OnlyFans' Economics

#484

Post by preciousoo »

blackhawkC17 wrote: post #292
paxys wrote: post #281

> The company counted an average of only 42 employees in 2023, down from 61 two years earlier. During the year, it generated $31MM in net revenue per employee (13-28x that of Amazon, Apple, Google, and Microsoft) and $15.5MM in operating profit (27-560x). This is the wildest part. One company that is proving all the "why does need 10000 engineers?" takes true.

They employ hundreds of contractors to run the operations.

It could be compliance/moderation efforts, this is not specified

Re: Breaking Down OnlyFans' Economics

#485

Post by FireBeyond »

vunderba wrote: post #465
flyingpenguin wrote: post #358

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't know about you, but I also find concerts very strange and off putting. Like, is "Denver" really a special crowd? I'm pretty sure you are doing a very staged reppeded performance but making us think its specially for us. I like things without crowd interaction, like musicals/plays, because there is no dystopian parasocial aspect to it. I am only there because the live is different than the recording.

I'm 100% with you. When people say that they go to these types of events and say things like they're "feeling the energy", I just can't understand at all. All I'm feeling is the massive amount of BTUs being emitted by humans packed in close proximity... However, give me a good piano recital with elevated seating to be able to see the pianist hands, and I'll be there in a flash.

How is a solo classical pianist's concert any less staged, rehearsed or repeated performance than any other concert, other than a (not so) vague sense of elitism?

Unless you're close, you're not catching the nuance of the pianist's hands any more than guitar licks from a guitar frontman. Indeed, many modern pianists are following in the footsteps of rock concerts and having live video camera work to capture these details for people not in the front 10 rows.

All this does is give vibes of "Area Man Constantly Mentioning He Doesn't Own A Television" (https://theonion.com/area-man-constantly-mentioning-he-doesn...).

Re: Breaking Down OnlyFans' Economics

#486

Post by alt227 »

almatabata wrote: post #289
Fargren wrote: post #261

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I would be in a relationship even with a current OF-girl. Not because "feminism told me so", but because I don't see anything wrong with it. Would you not have a relationship with someone you like and likes you back? Because patriarchy told you so?

> Would you not have a relationship with someone you like and likes you back? For a lot of men the knowledge of the OF carrier kills the attraction that they had. Just like some women lose attraction when they learn that you subscribe to OF content.

> Just like some women lose attraction when they learn that you subscribe to OF content.

Well said.

Re: Breaking Down OnlyFans' Economics

#488

Post by marcosdumay »

itishappy wrote: post #309
SecretDreams wrote: post #296

Earlier quoted context omitted.

But the OP is right about the parasocial aspect. OF content and other such platforms is about the personalization aspect. Sure, there's some kinks/fetishes too.. but it is primarily about engagement. In some ways, it's just an explicit, subscription based, social media platform where it feels like you're being treated uniquely... But most times you are not.

How is that particularly different from, say, concerts? The social aspects are what drives value.

People go to concerts to socialize with the crowd, not with the artist.

Re: Breaking Down OnlyFans' Economics

#489

Post by merrywhether »

AtlasBarfed wrote: post #404
jappgar wrote: post #277

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The problem here is that ceratain members of our society think sexuality is immoral and that sex performers deserve ostracism. The idea that someone shouldn't be hired for a job because they have/had an OF is puritanism plain and simple. I expect that fewer people actually care about the "morality" and simply want to use morals as a weapon against women in the workplace.

[flagged]

Are action or horror movies exploitation of the biological adrenaline drive? Every leisure activity is appealing to more than just hyper-rational thought.

Re: Breaking Down OnlyFans' Economics

#490

Post by ThrowawayR2 »

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…

Or how nerds are willing to argue about the superiority of Linux vs Mac vs Windows while having only faint notions of how to use each to their fullest extent or the workings of their internals. We on HN aren't immune from unthinking tribalism.
Post reply on HN