5 ms·

The casualization of the pornography industry

swagv 11y ago
https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=10133379 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=10133379
monksy 11y ago
Why is this listed on Hacker News. It does not appear to be related to technology or startups. My issue with this article is: This article attempts to paint the individual web cam-ers as people that are hurt. They are people who are attempting to engage in a business that is extremely cut-throat, and that is on low margins. (Also, happens to be "socially unacceptable" in many cultures.. that's another story, but it's used to abuse the reader) Additionally these people cut out larger businesses whom are highly regulated for a few more dollars. I wish that the article would have reported on the people who did this, some of the problems they faced, and left it at that. I'm tried of seeing stories that paints these people as "we need to fix this ill".
- tzs 11y ago
  > Why is this listed on Hacker News. It does not appear to be related to technology or startups. HN is not exclusively about technology or startups. From the Guidelines: On-Topic: Anything that good hackers would find interesting. That includes more than hacking and startups. If you had to reduce it to a sentence, the answer might be: anything that gratifies one's intellectual curiosity. Off-Topic: Most stories about politics, or crime, or sports, unless they're evidence of some interesting new phenomenon. Videos of pratfalls or disasters, or cute animal pictures. If they'd cover it on TV news, it's probably off-topic. The fact that you went on to read the article, and evidently put some thought into analyzing its content, indicates that it at least aroused your intellectual curiosity. Assuming you are a "good hacker", that would be a point of evidence toward the article being on-topic. Note that for many things, they arguably fall under both on-topic and off-topic based on the guidelines, so could probably go either way.
  - monksy 11y ago
    The thing is that it didn't raise an intellectual curiosity. (The article was meant to invoke outrage/emotion)
tzs 11y ago
For more comments see the earlier, dead, discussion: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=10133379 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=10133379
- dang 11y ago
  That one was flagkilled, as was this one. We've unkilled both so everyone can see them and so they don't stay closed for discussion.
  - PopeOfNope 11y ago
    We've unkilled both If it was flagkilled twice, why bring it back?
    - dang 11y ago
      In the case of the current thread, because when there's an ongoing discussion it seems sporting to let it continue. In the case of the previous thread, so people who click on tzs' link (and don't have showdead turned on) will be able to see it.
      - tzs 11y ago
        I had no idea that links to dead threads did not work for people without showdead turned on. I had always assumed that dead threads were just not shown on thread index pages, but if someone clicked on a link to one they would always see it. Now I wonder what other things I've mistakenly assumed about how HN works.
      - PopeOfNope 11y ago
        Fair enough. :)
eatonphil 11y ago
Interesting article, but I am having a hard time understanding how the title connects. And I'm actually not sure what the main thesis here is either - a little-known description of those who end up in porn nowadays? I'm not sure what I was supposed to take away.
- dang 11y ago
  The title is just typical sensationalism. We changed it to a more representative sentence from the article.

swagv 11y ago

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=10133379 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=10133379

Why is this listed on Hacker News. It does not appear to be related to technology or startups. My issue with this article is: This article attempts to paint the individual web cam-ers as people that are hurt. They are people who are attempting to engage in a business that is extremely cut-throat, and that is on low margins. (Also, happens to be "socially unacceptable" in many cultures.. that's another story, but it's used to abuse the reader) Additionally these people cut out larger businesses whom are highly regulated for a few more dollars. I wish that the article would have reported on the people who did this, some of the problems they faced, and left it at that. I'm tried of seeing stories that paints these people as "we need to fix this ill".

tzs 11y ago
> Why is this listed on Hacker News. It does not appear to be related to technology or startups. HN is not exclusively about technology or startups. From the Guidelines: On-Topic: Anything that good hackers would find interesting. That includes more than hacking and startups. If you had to reduce it to a sentence, the answer might be: anything that gratifies one's intellectual curiosity. Off-Topic: Most stories about politics, or crime, or sports, unless they're evidence of some interesting new phenomenon. Videos of pratfalls or disasters, or cute animal pictures. If they'd cover it on TV news, it's probably off-topic. The fact that you went on to read the article, and evidently put some thought into analyzing its content, indicates that it at least aroused your intellectual curiosity. Assuming you are a "good hacker", that would be a point of evidence toward the article being on-topic. Note that for many things, they arguably fall under both on-topic and off-topic based on the guidelines, so could probably go either way.
- monksy 11y ago
  The thing is that it didn't raise an intellectual curiosity. (The article was meant to invoke outrage/emotion)

tzs 11y ago

For more comments see the earlier, dead, discussion: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=10133379 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=10133379

dang 11y ago
That one was flagkilled, as was this one. We've unkilled both so everyone can see them and so they don't stay closed for discussion.
- PopeOfNope 11y ago
  We've unkilled both If it was flagkilled twice, why bring it back?
  - dang 11y ago
    In the case of the current thread, because when there's an ongoing discussion it seems sporting to let it continue. In the case of the previous thread, so people who click on tzs' link (and don't have showdead turned on) will be able to see it.
    - tzs 11y ago
      I had no idea that links to dead threads did not work for people without showdead turned on. I had always assumed that dead threads were just not shown on thread index pages, but if someone clicked on a link to one they would always see it. Now I wonder what other things I've mistakenly assumed about how HN works.
    - PopeOfNope 11y ago
      Fair enough. :)

eatonphil 11y ago

Interesting article, but I am having a hard time understanding how the title connects. And I'm actually not sure what the main thesis here is either - a little-known description of those who end up in porn nowadays? I'm not sure what I was supposed to take away.

dang 11y ago
The title is just typical sensationalism. We changed it to a more representative sentence from the article.