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

931–940 of 1001 posts

Re: OnlyFans to block sexually explicit videos starting in October

#931

Post by firloop »

Folcon wrote: post #922

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 mill…

Likely, the restrictions are coming at the card network level rather than the bank level. Building a Visa/Mastercard network is a much harder proposition than just buying a bank, especially as it pertains to consumer distribution.

Re: OnlyFans to block sexually explicit videos starting in October

#932

Post by belorn »

ribosometronome wrote: post #742
stale2002 wrote: post #535

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The point is that people who talk about a slippery slope were correct. The more that you let large and powerful organizations, get away with targeting groups that you don't like, the more likely that those powerful organizations are going to be able to turn the guns on you, or your favorite cause, when public opinion doesn't go your way. Neutral platforms, that don't discrimination, protects your enemies as well as y…

Assuming the issue is with payment processors, it's an existing issue. The same thing happened with Patreon and has been happening with other websites selling adult content for ages. If anything, the slope that they slipped down was the one resulting in Gab's troubles. Most people don't really want neutral platforms. If you go to a restaurant and another customer is violently drunk, yelling, and really just ruining t…

a violently drunk and yelling customer is causing harm to other customers. If they weren't we would be describing them as violently. How does adult content violently harm other content creators on OF?

If the restaurant kicked out a pair of customer because they happened to be in a same sex relationship, that would be less appreciated by other customers. They would ask the critical qualifying question "What harm have they done?", an question that distinguish the issue from the violently drunk.

Re: OnlyFans to block sexually explicit videos starting in October

#933

Post by lmm »

throwaway0a5e wrote: post #377
tmp_anon_22 wrote: post #330

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Yes, the payment processors will bark at the porn site. Move to a more expensive processor for that site only, pay 5%, 10% fee, it doesn't really matter, it's free money. If PH is having trouble processing any form of credit card, a smaller company will have no chance at all. We're seeing a sterilization of legitimate porn on the internet, done by legitimate tax paying western companies. It'll be left to whoever ca…

>We're seeing a sterilization of legitimate porn on the internet, done by legitimate tax paying western companies. It'll be left to whoever can operate beyond those constraints, Why wouldn't it just revert back to how it was before all the amateur stuff got monetized over the past 5yr or so.

There's a lot of people who are now in the habit of doing that and know how much money they can make. They're not all going to quietly go back to their old jobs.

Re: OnlyFans to block sexually explicit videos starting in October

#934

Post by biztos »

superfrank wrote: post #891
bjowen wrote: post #824

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The dispute rate is certainly true for companies under the general umbrella of “subscription services”, usually meaning porn / webcam sites, and there are trigger points where the payment processor will switch off a facility that exceeds a certain dispute volume. OF has been increasingly making use of step-up authentication to avoid disputes, which is the way the non-US payments industry is heading. My guess would be…

Oh, that article you linked is interesting, especially since it says it takes effect Oct 15 and OF's changes take place Oct 1st. I think at the company I worked at most of what is in there around record keeping wouldn't have been a problem because there were laws that required the company to do that already. The "pre-screening requirement" could be problematic though. > All uploaded content must be reviewed prior to…

I don’t think review per se would be such a problem: just charge a per-upload review fee. That might weed out some of the creators who are not yet making any money and can’t/won’t invest in the effort, but is that really a bad thing for the platform?

I think the hard part is the hand-wavy stuff you’re supposed to be looking for. How are you supposed to know whether some unusual sexual act violates their standards? Or whether gay porn is legal in all applicable jurisdictions for instance?

Re: OnlyFans to block sexually explicit videos starting in October

#935

Post by TimonKnigge »

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…

People's political views are generally interwoven with their notion of morality and in the case of the religious, that morality is informed by their religion. The idea that you can separate religion and politics is misguided at best.

Re: OnlyFans to block sexually explicit videos starting in October

#936

Post by austhrow743 »

Abishek_Muthian wrote: post #877
skrtskrt wrote: post #94

This is going to be corporate suicide on a greater scale than Tumblr's policy. I say greater because OnlyFans is/was still on a massive upswing whereas Tumblr was 10 years past its peak already when the nails went in the coffin. Edit: I understand this is supposedly not their choice.

I read that sex-workers have lost their livelihood during the pandemic due to lockdowns and have become more vulnerable. Then I read the interview of Aella, A OnlyFans creator making 5-figures on IndieHackers[1]. I always felt porn was an exploitative business so was never into it, But I gained respect for OnlyFans as a platform because it enabled people to move from dangerous, risky work to relatively safe work. As…

Is everyone else who isn't running a porn subscription company also robbing potential porn creators of a livelihood or is this a helping people a little is worse than doing nothing type situation?

Re: OnlyFans to block sexually explicit videos starting in October

#937

Post by onlyfansfan »

A question to you entrepreneurial types.

Why does an globally established and growing company with a proven business model want to raise a billion dollar investment?

It's money they'll have to pay back with interest and I assume there would be other strings attached (like the high risk implied by the title of this article). How is possibly better than organic growth at this point where they are probably close to market saturation (in the sense that further exponential growth is implausible)?

Re: OnlyFans to block sexually explicit videos starting in October

#938

Post by rvba »

lijogdfljk wrote: post #630
TameAntelope wrote: post #616

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I find it utterly fascinating that Reddit is able to maintain such a huge porn collection with relatively little attention. I wish I knew what percentage of submissions were in NSFW subreddits, but I wouldn't be surprised if it were the majority. Maybe it's because they're not trying to make money off of it? I don't think they run ads on NSFW subreddits. I wonder if there's a market for something like how strip clubs…

> I find it utterly fascinating that Reddit is able to maintain such a huge porn collection with relatively little attention. I suspect they're working in the same direction, no? For example a few months back they removed NSFW from /r/all. They didn't just make it user-config'd SFW by default, to my knowledge you cannot browse NSFW content on /r/all. So they sort of ghosted that entire genre on their site. Maybe they…

The problem with r/all is that iy does not show "all" since a long time.

They removed political spam and porn, but also lots of subreddits opt out to be shown there (e.g. sports subreddits).

As much as I hated the political spam from various TD clones, it is sad that there is no way to see "real" r/all and perhaps one that allows to remove porn and politics.

Re: OnlyFans to block sexually explicit videos starting in October

#940

Post by vrotaru »

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…

> Is it really such a mystery?

Powerful "Blame your political opponents" move and damn those Chesterton fences.

On a more serious note, it is not just porn and it's all about gene survival.

Men who do not care about the sexual freedom of their partners tend to got the way of Dodo. (for obvious reasons).

But I grant you that they may a live a more pleasant and relaxed life.

Post reply on HN