3 ms·

I am curious. Why does this news around OnlyFans strike a nerve with HN crowd? I hadn't heard about OnlyFans before this news exploded. Is OF known for thei

I am curious. Why does this news around OnlyFans strike a nerve with HN crowd? I hadn't heard about OnlyFans before this news exploded. Is OF known for their tech capabilities?

benjaminwootton 5y ago
Same here. Honest, guv.
bserge 5y ago
Because payment companies or banks with a history of shady shit are dictating morals.
ricardonunez 5y ago
Like somebody mentioned, companies trying to impose on people what their morals should be. The first time I heard about it was when a nurse/doctor got fired. Although some restrictions can be consider, what people do in their private life should not be anybody’s business unless it affects others.
cblconfederate 5y ago
because they moved the porn industry to the digital era, the same way that things moved from tv to youtube. there are no porn studios in OF but individual performers and this is a "disruption". Of course nobody knows if this will work for other types of content, but at least it worked for porn. OF pulled what youtube and google do when they "demonetize" people they don't like. It's generally a downgrade from an open market to one where there is not even the possibility to be in a low-volume nice.
watwut 5y ago
OnlyFans were mentioned on HN quite regularly before these news. Whenever topic of porn or relationships or social networks appeared. I learned about OnlyFans from here, months ago.
fragmede 5y ago
It's a pretty trivial CRUD app, if you want to be dismissive about the actual tech involved, but if you've read any of the discussion, you'd see that the tech largely isn't what's being discussed here. (And I'll bet the tech stack that powers FB messenger or Snapchat is endlessly fascinating, but you could similarly derisively call those CRUD apps.) OF is fun to talk about because, well, it's porn. But looking past the empowerment of mostly young women (top earners make O($100,000/month)), OF is of particular interesting to the HN crowd because it exposes a lie: digital money is not the same as physical cash. Having a gatekeeper say what you're allowed to spend your money on, is antithical to freedom. Whiiiiiiiich leads to cryptocurrency, which many a reader here finds interesting. The other theory that was previously being floated about was FOSTA-SESTA laws, which purports to be against sex trafficking, but ends up hurting the very group it says it's against, sex workers. Those laws are what closed down Craigslist personals and Backpages, for better or worse. (Which, according to sex workers, worse, since it has lead to sex workers being killed.) But see this is also of interest to HN readers because those bad laws mean a founder-CEO could face jail time if the police believes their MVP app/website promotes sex work in a primary way.
deleted 5y ago
[deleted]
TrackerFF 5y ago
Because CC companies (who are being forced by the government) can hold companies and startups in a chokehold until you play by their rules. And as much crap as crypto gets for its usability, this seems to be a legit opportunity for some cryptocurrency or service to shine through. (With that said - what's stopping banks from refusing to offer their services to crypto brokers?)

I am curious. Why does this news around OnlyFans strike a nerve with HN crowd? I hadn't heard about OnlyFans before this news exploded. Is OF known for their tech capabilities?

benjaminwootton 5y ago

Same here. Honest, guv.

bserge 5y ago

Because payment companies or banks with a history of shady shit are dictating morals.

ricardonunez 5y ago

Like somebody mentioned, companies trying to impose on people what their morals should be. The first time I heard about it was when a nurse/doctor got fired. Although some restrictions can be consider, what people do in their private life should not be anybody’s business unless it affects others.

cblconfederate 5y ago

because they moved the porn industry to the digital era, the same way that things moved from tv to youtube. there are no porn studios in OF but individual performers and this is a "disruption". Of course nobody knows if this will work for other types of content, but at least it worked for porn. OF pulled what youtube and google do when they "demonetize" people they don't like. It's generally a downgrade from an open market to one where there is not even the possibility to be in a low-volume nice.

watwut 5y ago

OnlyFans were mentioned on HN quite regularly before these news. Whenever topic of porn or relationships or social networks appeared. I learned about OnlyFans from here, months ago.

fragmede 5y ago

It's a pretty trivial CRUD app, if you want to be dismissive about the actual tech involved, but if you've read any of the discussion, you'd see that the tech largely isn't what's being discussed here. (And I'll bet the tech stack that powers FB messenger or Snapchat is endlessly fascinating, but you could similarly derisively call those CRUD apps.) OF is fun to talk about because, well, it's porn. But looking past the empowerment of mostly young women (top earners make O($100,000/month)), OF is of particular interesting to the HN crowd because it exposes a lie: digital money is not the same as physical cash. Having a gatekeeper say what you're allowed to spend your money on, is antithical to freedom. Whiiiiiiiich leads to cryptocurrency, which many a reader here finds interesting. The other theory that was previously being floated about was FOSTA-SESTA laws, which purports to be against sex trafficking, but ends up hurting the very group it says it's against, sex workers. Those laws are what closed down Craigslist personals and Backpages, for better or worse. (Which, according to sex workers, worse, since it has lead to sex workers being killed.) But see this is also of interest to HN readers because those bad laws mean a founder-CEO could face jail time if the police believes their MVP app/website promotes sex work in a primary way.

deleted 5y ago

[deleted]

TrackerFF 5y ago

Because CC companies (who are being forced by the government) can hold companies and startups in a chokehold until you play by their rules. And as much crap as crypto gets for its usability, this seems to be a legit opportunity for some cryptocurrency or service to shine through. (With that said - what's stopping banks from refusing to offer their services to crypto brokers?)