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

OnlyFans to block sexually explicit videos starting in October

bloomberg.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

921–930 of 1001 posts

Re: OnlyFans to block sexually explicit videos starting in October

#921

Post by [deleted] »

wonderwonder wrote: post #888
wrycoder wrote: post #842

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Bait and switch. Even if they lose the bulk of their customers, they will still have a bigger network than if they had started with the same platform, but without the porn.

Sure, but its a much smaller network than they had when they applied for financing at their desired valuation. Why would I give them a valuation of a billion dollars if they suddenly lose some large (by some estimates 60+ %) portion of their income. I think this begins their slow demise.

[deleted]

Re: OnlyFans to block sexually explicit videos starting in October

#922

Post by Folcon »

I may be being very naive here, so it would be great for someone to point out where I'm missing a trick, but if they make $2 billion in revenue and keep 20% of that, why don't they found or buy a small bank? I mean granted it's not their core business area, but it's a huge risk factor for them, so an acquisition doesn't seem out of the question to mitigate that risk...

According to here[0], banks need approx $20 million in startup capital. Now I don't know what onlyfan's costs are, but they seem to be sitting on a lot more than that or alternatively they could get financing.

Is there a reason this isn't a direction they've explored? The fact that they've not swapped to a more expensive payment provider implies that it's not a good option, but that may be a simpler solution, or they could provide a competitive option in this space?

- [0]: https://howtostartanllc.com/business-ideas/bank

Re: OnlyFans to block sexually explicit videos starting in October

#923

Post by 8draco8 »

c3534l wrote: post #817
nkrisc wrote: post #699

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Is it not a porn site? I thought it was a porn site.

When I first heard about it, people were comparing it to Patreon. Then it became porn because of some weird loophole in how credit card companies work. Credit cards and pornography is its whole massive side discussion.

I feel like this is what Twitch is also fighting against. Twitch started slowly becoming erotic streaming platform.

Re: OnlyFans to block sexually explicit videos starting in October

#925

Post by throwawaylinux »

camillomiller wrote: post #913
throwawaylinux wrote: post #709

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Who is "you"? What point is this rant supposed to be making? They're private companies, they have the freedom to do what they like, and "you" are free to start your own payment processor.

You is American culture. If you’re American, it’s YOUR country, the one who pretended to export democracy, and instead is only able to export its own puritanical and backward values on what they pretend to be a free global market. So yes, YOU.

I wasn't asking you, but this strange rant is even less coherent than the other one.

Re: OnlyFans to block sexually explicit videos starting in October

#926

Post by sershe »

throwaway5752 wrote: post #534
paxys wrote: post #480

Earlier quoted context omitted.

A huge chunk of the planet is forced into jobs they don't like to provide for themselves and their families. What's so "dignifying" about a job getting humiliated by entitled customers in retail or waitressing for minimum wage or breaking your body doing hard manual labor? Religious morality is the only reason a much more safe, comfortable and lucrative option like OnlyFans is banned.

I think you should accept some people think of it differently. And let's be frank here. OF is probably a viable financial opportunity - on average - for a small number of more attractive that normal people, and it's probably weighted towards younger women. I'd love to have hard data to present to you, but I can't find it. I have literally zero problem with people who want to use OF to support themselves. However, let…

The point is, why would you specifically single out sex work? Why should the people "still be able to work a 40 hour job and pay for food and rent" without getting involved in sex work in particular? I.e. jobs with far less dignity, or far more danger (e.g. logging), less comfort, etc., are ok in that broad "work a 40 hour job" category, but sex work is not ok? You could as well say "some people find retail jobs degrading/exhausting/unfulfilling [many if not most retail workers do, I suspect], so they should still be able to work a 40 hour [non-retail] job and pay for food and rent".

The only real reason to single out OF (an objectively superior option to a median job, if you can get it) is precisely the puritanical morality.

Re: OnlyFans to block sexually explicit videos starting in October

#927

Post by nindalf »

iab wrote: post #872
imwillofficial wrote: post #855

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You used many words and said nothing.

Its the inverse of the "Kevin from the office" meme

Why pursue brevity in speech when a veritable volley of verbiage will provide the necessary and sufficient verisimilitude?

Re: OnlyFans to block sexually explicit videos starting in October

#928

Post by that_guy_iain »

autoexec wrote: post #770
jachee wrote: post #765

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Anyone who does will face the same pressure from payout vendors. No one corporate wants to be actively involved in paying sex workers.

Is this still true? Porn sites seem to have no problems selling ad space, although it may not be to major brands. I suspect that eventually even that will change. How many people are really so put off by human sexuality that they'll refuse to buy a product that advertises on a porn site? How many of those people are going to porn sites to see those ads in the first place? I think that slowly corporations are going to…

I think the difference is with porn sites the actors have signed contracts and gone through several legal requirements to ensure a "safe" enviorment. They also generally don't do the more extreme porn fetishes that are illegal in some countries (Think rape/incest roleplay. But the list is massive.)

Onlyfans and sites similar often attract the small fetish sex workers because the demand isn't big enough for a major company to pick up on them on a regular basis but the demand is enough they can make serious money freelancing.

Re: OnlyFans to block sexually explicit videos starting in October

#929

Post by regularfry »

smokey_circles wrote: post #898
bamboozled wrote: post #809

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is pretty stupid though, to throw away the business you have for the business you might have, there is heaps of porn on Twitter, looking at it is optional. Why can't it just co-exist with other "acceptable" content ? I would imagine it's very trivial to have a "Show me explicit content" setting. Edit: Side note, I don’t know why porn is so shameful, especially concerning adults posting high quality content, it’s…

>Side note, I don’t know why porn is so shameful Is it really such a mystery? Mostly every religion prohibits sexual freedom and most every government has deeply religious members in the legislature. There is no separation of the church's morals and political ones. Which means yes, I'm suggesting a ban on religion in the political space. I don't mean you can't be a politician if you're religious, I mean you should be…

It's not the political leadership, it's the financial levers. Visa and Mastercard, specifically.

Yes, there's an overlap there, but your use of the expression "a ban on religion in the political space" highlights the problem. To frame it first as a political problem in the sense of political parties and professional politicians misses where the harm is being done; and to expand the definition of "political space" in your ban to include private financial operators would ban religion entirely.

And that's also not possible to do while calling yourself a free country.

Re: OnlyFans to block sexually explicit videos starting in October

#930

Post by globular-toast »

taylodl wrote: post #257

Sadly I know girls who are using OnlyFans to keep a roof over their heads and stay out of abusive relationships. Whether we like what they're doing to make money OnlyFans was providing them a much-needed revenue stream. Now that's being taken away from them by the morality police who won't be affected by the consequences of their own decisions.

Firstly, I don't believe you. I'm sure those girls have something to offer society besides showing their bodies for cash. They just don't bother trying because they don't have to.

Second, OnlyFans is an abusive relationship. It's using women during the few years they are attractive enough to exploit the instincts of men. The instant their looks wear off, they're out.

Post reply on HN