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

51–60 of 878 posts

Re: Breaking Down OnlyFans' Economics

#51

Post by [deleted] »

doix wrote: post #30
CSMastermind wrote: post #28

I have a buddy how likes to tell how he "had the idea for Onlyfans first" but I advised him not to pursue it. The reality is that OnlyFans wasn't the first to try this model. You have to give them credit for successfully building the business, especially with several close calls between them and government regulations.

Yeah, I'm sure millions of people had this idea. My friends and I talked about it at some point as well. The problem is the payment processor. How the heck do you accept adult-content related payments? That is the hardest problem to solve when it comes to these things in my book.

[deleted]

Re: Breaking Down OnlyFans' Economics

#52

Post by cruffle_duffle »

squigz wrote: post #32
kiba wrote: post #21

Earlier quoted context omitted.

A good AI girlfriend wouldn't be a therapist but would mimics every aspect of a girlfriend, including arguments and fights and makeups, because that's how bonding occurs. That's going to be how successful AI girlfriend will be made.

Nobody is going to pay for an AI girlfriend service for it to breakup with the user and refuse to get back together - because that's how growth happens in reality. What AI girlfriends will do is mimic perfect Hollywood relationships, complete with hot makeup sex.

Isn’t there a rule on the internet that says “if you can imagine it, there is porn for it” and “if there isn’t porn for it, somebody is making it”?

I’m pretty sure that applies to this scenario too. I’m 100% sure that there exists a set of customers who would pay good money to get dumped by a realistic AI girlfriend. And once dumped they’ll turn around and pay for the next AI model to dump them only in some other fashion. Maybe the AI model thinks the customers anatomy is the wrong dimensions? Maybe they smell? Maybe they are too short or tall? Perhaps the AI “girlfriend” is a triple tentacled sea monster who wants to return to oceans on Titan? Doesn’t matter. Somebody will pay very good money to experance it.

You want a hot quad breasted space babe who cheats on you with bubble wrap covered little people? Done. Want that with extra bondage? Done.

This is the internet after all. Why pay for a boring “normal” AI girlfriend when the sky is the limit? I say, use your imagination.

Re: Breaking Down OnlyFans' Economics

#53

Post by mervz »

xyst wrote: post #22

Wow - those AI generated influencers would be enough to fool older populations. If I was a shitty person, I would build my own network of “influencers” to manage and pump money from the lonely/desperate. Baby steps towards the “dead internet theory”

Yeah, I'm sure you "would".

Re: Breaking Down OnlyFans' Economics

#54

Post by stonogo »

ZoomZoomZoom wrote: post #29
l0ng1nu5 wrote: post #26

Earlier quoted context omitted.

[flagged]

Why? They're common people, not sociopaths.

I'd say the set of people who want an AI girlfriend and the set of people whose defining trait is a lack of empathy is probably a bigger overlap than you think.

Re: Breaking Down OnlyFans' Economics

#55

Post by dragonwriter »

jimmygrapes wrote: post #37
dragonwriter wrote: post #25

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> 2/3 of its revenues were from the U.S. That's... sad. Probably common for a lot of luxury products; US is like 1/4 of world GDP, and a lot higher than that in personal income beyond basic needs.

But still around 4 to 5% of the global population. Every stat in the global context of usage/consumerism gets weird when you consider this, and even weirder when you account for debt-to-income ratio.

> But still around 4 to 5% of the global population.

Yeah, but so? "Subsisitence farmers in sub-Saharan Africa spend substantially less per capita on online adult entertainment than Americans" is...not a surprising bit of information.

> Every stat in the global context of usage/consumerism gets weird when you consider this

Seems to me that the weird thing is the implicit premise that consumer and especially luxury spending should be expected to track population and not wealth.

> and even weirder when you account for debt-to-income ratio.

Are you assuming that the ability to borrow should be negatively correlated with luxury spending?

Re: Breaking Down OnlyFans' Economics

#56

Post by kylehotchkiss »

MostlyStable wrote: post #47
kylehotchkiss wrote: post #46

I find myself a little sad at how lucrative a job this will appear for an entire generation. $1500 average creator pay is higher than 40 hours a week minimum wage.

That's $1500 annually for the average creator, and due to concentration at the top, the median take home is going to be even lower than that.

Doh! I read that as monthly. My bad.

Re: Breaking Down OnlyFans' Economics

#57

Post by fsckboy »

Loughla wrote: post #35
ZoomZoomZoom wrote: post #29

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Why? They're common people, not sociopaths.

I think maybe it's my own personal bias, but it does feel like anyone who pays money for an AI girlfriend really won't want it to disagree with them. I believe they'll want an idyllic and fantasy version of a relationship.

you are saying that the ai gf will not be like a real human female, but you are not making any argument that there is a defect in the bf's attachment to the gf.

Re: Breaking Down OnlyFans' Economics

#58

Post by dragonwriter »

kylehotchkiss wrote: post #46

I find myself a little sad at how lucrative a job this will appear for an entire generation. $1500 average creator pay is higher than 40 hours a week minimum wage.

> $1500 average creator pay is higher than 40 hours a week minimum wage.

Only in jurisdictions where minimum wage is less than $0.72/hr.

Re: Breaking Down OnlyFans' Economics

#59

Post by fsckboy »

stonogo wrote: post #54
ZoomZoomZoom wrote: post #29

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Why? They're common people, not sociopaths.

I'd say the set of people who want an AI girlfriend and the set of people whose defining trait is a lack of empathy is probably a bigger overlap than you think.

lack of empathy does not stand in the way of forming an attachment. Empathy is a good feature for keeping a partner, but the ai doesn't care about that. It feels like people on your side of the argument are making a sort of moral/judgmental argument, "if you can't hold up your side of the bargain, you don't deserve an ai gf"

Re: Breaking Down OnlyFans' Economics

#60

Post by bitzun »

jjmarr wrote: post #48
kiba wrote: post #21

Earlier quoted context omitted.

A good AI girlfriend wouldn't be a therapist but would mimics every aspect of a girlfriend, including arguments and fights and makeups, because that's how bonding occurs. That's going to be how successful AI girlfriend will be made.

Your assumption is that the status quo provides those things. Nowadays, people will break up as soon as they get "the ick" or just have a rotating group of people they see. Lasting relationships are much less common than they used to be because it's easier to switch partners. People just want to chase a local maximum of constant validation that they're pretty/smart/correct. They don't see or understand the value in w…

> people in their teens and early 20s are being hooked en masse.

Any reference for the scale of this? It feels unlikely to me from my bubble but I only know one or two people I think would be likely to try it.

Post reply on HN