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

Under the skin of OnlyFans

bbc.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

51–60 of 615 posts

Re: Under the skin of OnlyFans

#51

Post by rorykoehler »

SilverRed wrote: post #45
650REDHAIR wrote: post #20

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…

Have you considered the alternative that this is not an evil which you are unable to control but just another way of living / thinking of sexual content? There is nothing inherently evil about this stuff so why is it terrible that it is becoming more accepted/common? If in 30 years we live in a society where people post nudes like they do facebook posts, is there anything wrong about this? Could you describe the harm…

I think I sit in the middle on this. I don't think it is evil but if you dig under the surface a little you will find a lot of trauma, anxiety and desperation whether it is narcissistic instagram posts or OF style porn.

Re: Under the skin of OnlyFans

#52

Post by brundolf »

Mandelmus wrote: post #46
ryandrake wrote: post #28

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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 legaliza…

I don't think I'm merely being a luddite or overly conservative when I say that the exponential rise of parasocial entertainment worries me greatly. There's a rising loneliness epidemic in much of the developed world, and entire industries that profit from selling a virtual simulacrum of the experience of hanging out with friends (Twitch) or intimacy (OnlyFans). Much like Facebook and social media, these products can…

I can testify that I went through a lonely period a few years ago, and stumbled upon Twitch, and was immediately weirded out by how much of an effect it had on my emotions. It felt like I could point and click and immediately have the experience of hanging out with someone, belonging, having something that felt anchoring, without making any of the hard social effort that's always been a challenge for me.

I couldn't point to any one thing that was wrong about the arrangement... I just had this feeling that it wasn't something I should let myself get too comfy with.

Re: Under the skin of OnlyFans

#53

Post by ipaddr »

chii wrote: post #17
jazzyjackson wrote: post #7

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.

Throw in author, professor, forensic crime specialist and the American dream.

Re: Under the skin of OnlyFans

#54

Post by Manuel_D »

rorykoehler wrote: post #48
superkuh wrote: post #4

The BBC is really digging deep and far away from OnlyFans itself in order to try to generate the moral outrage needed to justify their puritan anti-porn stance. Most of this article seems to be about things that happen outside of the website or instances where users violated the terms of service.

I can't understand your position. OF is designed in such a way that it perpetuates certain types of behaviour. You can't hand wave away TOS transgressions when the whole system is setup for weirdo's to easily and repeatedly break the TOS.

It's not just TOS violations. Accounts getting hacked, unless there was a vulnerability on the company's side, is totally nonsensical to blame on the company. They have the ability to set up MFA but the creator didn't use it. And this happens on non-adult platforms, too.

Re: Under the skin of OnlyFans

#55

Post by HWR_14 »

superkuh wrote: post #4

The BBC is really digging deep and far away from OnlyFans itself in order to try to generate the moral outrage needed to justify their puritan anti-porn stance. Most of this article seems to be about things that happen outside of the website or instances where users violated the terms of service.

Saying its okay because "users violated the terms of service" is a weak cop out. If we know the consequences of people posting, it should be made clear to them the real consequences. Not just if people abide by the ToS.

Re: Under the skin of OnlyFans

#56

Post by tolbish »

SilverRed wrote: post #45
650REDHAIR wrote: post #20

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…

Have you considered the alternative that this is not an evil which you are unable to control but just another way of living / thinking of sexual content? There is nothing inherently evil about this stuff so why is it terrible that it is becoming more accepted/common? If in 30 years we live in a society where people post nudes like they do facebook posts, is there anything wrong about this? Could you describe the harm…

Instant Gratification as a Service gets criticized all the time.

Re: Under the skin of OnlyFans

#57

Post by ixacto »

labster wrote: post #30
chii wrote: post #17

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> 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.

The NCAA is much more predatory. Yes you get free college but sports can be the focus 100% of the time, then there is no focus on academics.

So when you don't get drafted, there is a little problem...

Onlyfans is stupid, hopefully noone has faced violence in the real world from it.

Re: Under the skin of OnlyFans

#58

Post by pcbro141 »

throwmeawaydddy wrote: post #33

Fire up the throwaway! Not 100% related to the article, but directly related. I worked as developer for a product in the same niche ("democratizing adult content"). I spent almost 2 years working on the frontend, devops, and building out the analytics engine (all pre-covid). Anyway, on to the comment at hand. We had a small number of users compared to OnlyFans (when I left, there were about 20K active content creator…

Not surprised. I would just assume eventually some sexually frustrated person would try to doxx you at some point. I think there are even organized groups dedicated to doing just that. Sexually frustrated/not getting laid + seeing women making money off their sexuality ('unfair') makes some of these people incredibly angry.

Re: Under the skin of OnlyFans

#59

Post by jollybean »

ryandrake wrote: post #28
650REDHAIR wrote: post #20

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 legaliza…

You're not getting older, the world is changing, and that it changes doesn't remotely mean 'it's better'.

'Change' is not 'Progress' - I think that when we are young we tend to way over conflate those things. Usually there might be some reasonable impetus, I find 'change movements' usually lack nuance.

Marx was dead right in so many of his observations and yet nobody is seriously a Marxist today i.e. 'legit concerns' don't necessarily map to 'good change'.

Though change is inevitable ... the nature of the change is not inevitable.

There is some good to OnlyFans, at least in that 'creators' get paid instead of middle-men, but on the whole, I think it's a bad thing. I just don't think we're going to look back on this as a good idea.

I think impressionable young minds are not going to be able to grasp what it means to have that content 'out there forever' and when they get a little older they'll probably have a significant shift in their view.

Re: Under the skin of OnlyFans

#60

Post by throwawayboise »

jazzyjackson wrote: post #35
vmception wrote: post #22

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

Maybe predatory was too specific, I agree it fits better when someone is on-the-hook for debt. My thinking is just that it’s enticing people into this line of work, like a bait and switch, you thought you would be getting a steady monthly income but instead you get a few bucks a week and entitled creeps sending you death threats.

Exploitative might be the better word.
Post reply on HN