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

851–860 of 878 posts

Re: Breaking Down OnlyFans' Economics

#851

Post by acdha »

inemesitaffia wrote: post #824
acdha wrote: post #628

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There’s a bit of a difference when it’s a corporate officer, and the action in question is not their personal freedom but attempting to restrict other people’s freedoms, including many of the people who would report to them. Someone having an OF doesn’t impact anyone else but there’s at least a valid argument that Eich went beyond his personal freedom of speech when it came to materially contributing to the removal o…

It's identical. The difference is where you stand on the reason. Someone in this thread has pointed out that the it's only the actions considered unacceptable that have changed

Here’s why I don’t think they’re identical:

In the first case, someone is making decisions in their personal life which do not affect anyone else. They are not asking for special treatment, they are only asking that other people stay out of their private life. They also do not have any authority over other people and are not setting policies.

In the second case, someone is acting publicly to take away freedoms from other people even though their exercise of those freedoms had no impact on them personally. That person is also in a policy-making position over many affected people.

I think it’s reasonable to say that the two cases are different both due to the internal vs. external direction and the distinction and power differential.

Re: Breaking Down OnlyFans' Economics

#852

Post by jewelry »

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…

> I find these new pimps scarier than the old sort in that they pretend to have clean hands The old one does. And I disagree this is worse, as it’s probably just you never encounter the old model yourself or not knowing the history enough to do the comparison. From the book I read, across cultures and societies, old model of pimping is very brutal, on both the client and the server sides.

Re: Breaking Down OnlyFans' Economics

#853

Post by broken-kebab »

ath3nd wrote: post #376
broken-kebab wrote: post #244

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's whataboutism, isn't it? It surely hypocritical when someone only fights other's sin while ignoring own (and one mainstream religion has a special piece about it - speck in a brother's eye). But my harmful behavior still doesn't make your harmful behavior good, and vice versa

> But my harmful behavior still doesn't make your harmful behavior good, and vice versa In principle I agree. We have a society praising a soldier for killing and risks losing limbs and life (basically selling his body) during military service, but demonizing a sex worker. This society needs to take a good hard look in the mirror. We have people admonishing sex work and marijuana use, while its most "successful" memb…

This is pretty illogical comparison. When we praise soldiers, we do it not for them getting paid for their bodies, but for hard work, and risks they take protecting us.

Re: Breaking Down OnlyFans' Economics

#854

Post by nemothekid »

somenameforme wrote: post #145
AmericanChopper wrote: post #68

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The idea that success is earned through luck rather than merit is a firmly ideological position, regardless of the domain you’re talking about. If you succeeded via luck then that provides a better moral justification for the related ideological position that you should be deprived of the fruits of your labor as much as possible, for redistribution to others who were simply less lucky than you. It’s really just sour…

One of the few domains where this is testable has also demonstrated this. Writing is about as hard to break into as anything, yet Stephen King demonstrated success writing under a completely unknown alias. [1] No he didn't immediately received the same level of reception and success as Stephen King does, but neither did Stephen King at first! That's why it's skill + dedication. If you look at some of the old videos o…

The mistake you (and a lot of others are making) is that the people who didn’t make it just weren’t skilled enough.

That isn’t true - I think the people who don’t make it are massively skilled. It’s not random in the sense it’s just selecting randomly from the population. It’s random in the sense that there are 100 elite content producers but at any given moment there is only space for 10 of them.

Stephen King has a massive leg up for already having built the inroads for having a successful book. I think if you give any elite, yet unknown writer, the same tools, editor, and publisher they would succeed. But to truly succeed from nothing may just depend on going to school with someone who became an editor, or the editor’s daughter showing them a TikTok. That’s what is meant by it’s largely random.

Re: Breaking Down OnlyFans' Economics

#857

Post by lupusreal »

AlexeyBelov wrote: post #829
lupusreal wrote: post #654

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Knowing somebody before being in a relationship with them is anything but unusual. Even if you start dating somebody you never knew before you still get to know each other before making any sort of commitment. Keep coping though.

Coping with what?

He's coping with having made a fool of himself with absurd simpism.

Re: Breaking Down OnlyFans' Economics

#858

Post by dragonwriter »

lynx23 wrote: post #122
braza wrote: post #118

Not a moralistic take, but one issue that interests me is the second-order impacts associated with the long tail of producers in OF who do not make a career from it. With traditional adult entertainment, creators are aware of the social ramifications (e.g., social stigma, familial ostracism, difficulty dealing with the future, and so on), and there is a decent theoretical economic framework to measure that. I am not…

Well, those civilians who can think for themselves, especially about the consequences of their actions, are clearly in advantage. I am lacking empathy for those who are apparently so hooked up to the here-and-now that they seem to ignore the future. If you sell your body, most societies will punish you. Thats fine, societies have all sorts of norms we all need to learn.

> If you sell your body, most societies will punish you.

No, if you sell sex, lots of societies will punish you. Selling or renting your body otherwise -- which a very large share of jobs involve just as much as sex work does -- is otherwise lauded.

> Thats fine, societies have all sorts of norms we all need to learn.

Lots of norms that societies have or historically have had would be better eliminated. That something is an existing norm isn't an argument in favor of it being a norm.

Re: Breaking Down OnlyFans' Economics

#859

Post by dragonwriter »

paulryanrogers wrote: post #248
TeMPOraL wrote: post #221

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Even coming from mainstream religions, that's annoyingly knee-jerk. Sure, prostitution is shameful and sinful and whatnot, but what about maliciously lying to your neighbor, trying to get rich off their misfortune? Even from a mainstream religious perspective, marketing gives prostitution a run for its money, and outside that framework, arguably it's less shameful to do OF than to be a "regular" influencer, or go int…

> At least with this kind of sex work, all parties to transaction tend to benefit, and all are in it voluntarily. Haven't some OF creators come out admitting they were pressured into it, or at least doing it more than they'd like.

I think you'll find that lots of people in non-sex-work, non-stigmatized, socially respected jobs feel like they were pressured into them and/or currently doing more of the work they are in than they'd like due to economic coercion.

Re: Breaking Down OnlyFans' Economics

#860

Post by matrix87 »

standardUser wrote: post #850
matrix87 wrote: post #807

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Some jobs have more of those expectations. If you don't have to worry about them that just reflects your own advantageous position

That seems like a false claim - that "advantageous" jobs are less likely to care. I'd argue people seeking high-visibility, high-prestige jobs are more at risk from backlash about having made porn. But thanks for playing.

Well there is some wiggle room here, public school teachers have more of these types of expectations than software engineers. It isn't just high-visibility jobs
Post reply on HN