> The O-1 category includes the O-1A, which is designated for individuals with extraordinary ability in the sciences, education, business or athletics and the O-1B, reserved for those with “extraordinary ability or achievement”.
Then later it says
> The O-1B visa, once reserved for Hollywood titans and superstar musicians, has evolved over the years.
I understand those two aren't necessarily contradictory, but the wording of the first sentence paints a very different mental picture than the second one (at least it did for me), especially since they throw in the O-1A and then almost exclusively talk about people applying for the O-1B after that.
Personally, I don't want the US choosing to give visas to influencers over scientists, but if this visa was already being heavily used to bring in actors, musicians, and athletes I don't see what the hubbub is about. I don't use TikTok or OnlyFans and I don't find e-sports entertaining, but I have a hard time arguing that a screen actor, Victoria's Secret model, or soccer player should be worthy of a visa and a social media star, OnlyFans model, or a professional Counter Strike player shouldn't is not. It's all just entertainment.
I am not a lawyer. But OF models using O1 visa is totally fine. It is the intended purpose. The visa itself is meant for researchers, scholars who have job offers, athletes, actors etc. it has no cap and clear criteria. OF models who make a lot of money should totally qualify for this.
Also this visa in uncapped so giving visas to OF models does not take away anything from scientists and others.
O visa's original intent was to help pretty ladies from Eastern Europe to be brought into the country as indentured workers. That is why it is so easy to get this visa for an actor or a fashion model but very tough to get someone for their research.
I thought the reason for this to be a visa is because their fields' activities were in-person (acting in movies/plays/shows, academic life & research, sports training & leagues, etc). A streamer / OF worker is not like that as far as I know (but e-sports is). So this is purely to bring people with money and/or influence, nothing exceptional except the number of 0's.
What I know from news articles is that some of them openly "escort", like some traditional porn stars did more quietly. The fame on the screen can be brand-building for the even more lucrative in-person work.
As one said in a quote, regarding AI threat and crumbling economies: "The oldest profession will be the last profession."
If some of them want to move to the US right now, from currently healthier countries, one reason may be that social inequality means there are many deep-pocketed customers able to pay 5 figures for a weekend experience.
The decline of the US means that there will be increasingly fewer deep-pocketed customers able to pay 5 figures for anything.
Those who come to the US with enough money on the bank will have access to a lifestyle and experiences that are becoming more and more exclusive, which makes for great content for the peasant class to consume on their phones.
> The decline of the US means that there will be increasingly fewer deep-pocketed customers able to pay 5 figures for anything.
Those at the top are doing very well, it's those without access to capital who are struggling. America in decline looks like a bifurcated economy where low-paying jobs catering to the desires of the wealthy take up an increasingly large share of the economy. You can decide for yourself to what extent this is already happening.
A world war and a socialist-minded president could correct that for a good couple of decades but this time the US is going to be on the wrong side of history.
As an outsider, it's interesting to watch Nero play the fiddle while the rest of the world sanctions the US (except India and the Middle East and Taiwan). I think this is how the average Roman felt during Honorius' reign.
US invading Greenland means all US troops in Europe risk getting captured/foxholed in their own military bases. That's 65k permanent staff and 20-35k on rotation. Or 10% of the US military, simply turning PoW (and a huge bargaining chip so early in the conflict).
It will also signal to the world that America is no longer world police, which means the Middle East, Japan and Taiwan will once again come under threat. The Middle East already foresaw this, which is why Saudi Arabia, Turkey and Pakistan are building a regional nuclear-enabled alliance, with open invitation to the other oil economies. Taiwan is most likely to get caught with their pants down, given the lack of US military support.
Interestingly, with the exist of the US from NATO, the largest military in NATO will be Turkey's, that country that Europe has long considered the unwanted bastard child.
That's fantasy. I seriously doubt Trump will invade Greenland, but even if so, there will be zero consequences for U.S. forces in Europe. Europe's armed forces are not capable of taking on U.S. troops in Europe.
Conversely -- declining countries usually have a lot of deep-pocketed customers, and mind less of whether their crimes go public. They also tend to care less of spending money in wasteful ways, as those money were easily earned.
I wouldn't prophesize the 'decline' of the US, but if you're sufficiently wealthy, the kind of services and lifestyle options (like living in a luxury apartment overlooking the sea, or decent medical care), is available in a lot of places nowadays.
Well it's already declining. Remove the AI and tech industry and the US economy is in literal decline. Invading Greenland ensures NATO is crippled, Taiwan is left undefended and China finds a great excuse to impose sanctions on the US as part of a coordinated effort. That's a huge chunk of the semiconductor manufacturing lifecycle that becomes inaccessible to the US.
USA is doing pretty well and far from decline not withstanding local minimas they might hit.
When economic outlook is bad, it is generally the middle class and lower class that gets hit the hardest and women in these categories end up joining sin professions. Vegas always sees a big boom in 21 year olds in strip clubs when economy is bad.
Right now strip clubs are full of 35+ women why ? All the young ones are on OF. It is safer and much cleaner way of making money
I believe they are implying that the US itself isn't in a healthy state. Economic disparity mostly, but also politically, socially, and likely physically. I think many would agree.
It increases the countries' soft power if people around the world watch content from there.
Eg. a self-reinforcing cycle that you get the best from the other immigrant categories arriving because they choose the country where everything "seems to be happening".
> I thought the reason for this to be a visa is because their fields' activities were in-person (acting in movies/plays/shows, academic life & research, sports training & leagues, etc). A streamer / OF worker is not like that as far as I know (but e-sports is).
Just like film work (which it is a kind of, in a sense), any place can be an OF set, but you need a set and, for performances with more than one performer, you generally need the performers at the same set. Physical proximity to both sets that you want to use and other performers who you might do recurring joint performances with seem to have obvious utility.
As I understand it [1], usually if you try to cross the border declaring you intend to engage in sex work, they turn you away. Some combination of prudishness and concern about trafficking.
For there to be a special sex worker visa is a surprise, to me.
The distinction is that this is meant to bring in women in service to a man such that they’re sponsor is also their new boss in sex work, rather than women who service men while maintaining independent free will to control their career in sex work. The phrase “sex worker” could refer to either scenario and it’s important to distinguish the former from the latter in order to understand just how that particular criteria came to be. (And, yeah, it can be quite uncomfortable to discover that the U.S. has a special immigration pathway for wealthy and/or politically-connected men to import women as sex servants. Isn’t history swell, congress protects its privileges quite effectively, etc.)
It's strange, but is it really surprising? It's not like hypocrisy and moat building are new things in American politics.
These days I wouldn't even be surprised to discover it was intentional. Some person or group wanted to ensure they could engage in sex trafficking with a superficially legal cover, but didn't want it to actually be legal.
O visa is sponsored by an employer. The employer has to provide reasons why the person is being brought in USA. It makes perfect sense for USA to bring as many OF models as they want into USA as it could mean $$$$ in revenue for IRS, more money for US business and since these models are typically young there is lower load on any kind of welfare.
> A streamer / OF worker is not like that as far as I know (but e-sports is).
Well Streamer vs Influencer can be different potentially, that said I can think of one example even for video game streamers, that being the AGDQ charity event where speedrunners/streamers do stuff live for charity at the event space.
> I thought the reason for this to be a visa is because their fields' activities were in-person (acting in movies/plays/shows, academic life & research, sports training & leagues, etc). A streamer / OF worker is not like that as far as I know
An OnlyFans worker may make the bulk of her money by meeting fans in person for dates. That can't be done over the internet.
While possible to be for physical sex work, I think the previous commenter meant by meeting fans, would be like at a meet-and-greet at a Con, so they can further increase the parasocial relationship with the people giving them subscriptions, signing autographs. Also, they may be doing collabs with other content creators, just as comedians and actors will be on each others podcasts.
INA §212(a)(2)(D) renders inadmissible any alien who:
(i) is coming to the United States solely, principally, or incidentally to engage in prostitution, or has engaged in prostitution within 10 years of the date of application for a visa, admission, or adjustment of status,
(ii) directly or indirectly procures or attempts to procure, or (within 10 years of the date of application for a visa, admission, or adjustment of status) procured or attempted to procure or to import, prostitutes or persons for the purpose of prostitution, or receives or (within such 10-year period) received, in whole or in part, the proceeds of prostitution, or
(iii) is coming to the United States to engage in any other unlawful commercialized vice, whether or not related to prostitution
Obviously these people should be applying for EB-1s since that is the established visa program for prostitutes.
If they stream the sex on their OF feed, then it's not prostitution. Even if model is paid by the other person, it would be difficult to legally separate it from any other adult entertainment contract.
> An OnlyFans worker may make the bulk of her money by meeting fans in person for dates.
I don't believe it. Do you have any evidence? As I understand, the money is made two ways: (1) regular subscriptions and (2) whales that pay for extra content. Also, most of them have private chat and email, which I assume is serviced offshore from somewhere like the Philippines where it is cheap and easy to hire English speakers.
Until they retire and need end of life Medicare which is very expensive.
That's why some countries like Dubai have devised a work visa system that lets people work for decades but never lets them become citizens so Dubai can kick out the moment they stop working, before they need end of life care.
OF models make money until a certain age though. Sure, not too different to the current job market you could argue, but usually any "influencer" career today is quite short lived if you haven't a very specific niche.
In my country prostitution is legal, but I think some countries are very hypocritical here about OF.
For all other candidates, at least three of the following criteria must be met in order to qualify for the O1B visa:
Having been or will be performing a lead or starring role in productions or events which have a distinguished national or international reputation (as evidenced by critical reviews, advertisements, press releases, publications contracts, or endorsements)
Critical reviews or other published material in professional or major trade publications or in the major media by or about the applicant which show that the applicant has achieved national or international recognition or achievements
Evidence of performance in a lead, starring or critical role for organizations or establishments with distinguished reputations
Evidence of a record of major commercial or critically acclaimed successes in the performing arts, as shown by box office receipts or record, cassette, compact disk, or video sales
Evidence of significant recognition for achievements from organizations, government agencies, or other recognized experts in the field
Evidence of having commanded a high salary or other significantly high remuneration for services in relation to others
Other comparable evidence (This category is not available for those in the motion picture industry)
For traditional arts, you've gotta be good.
For an influencer... some number of anonymous followers?
There are certainly some that would qualify... but it they should be held to the same standards as others.
There's a boy band, Boy Throb who specifically leveraged visa application in their recent content, and their immigration attorney advised the visa would be approved when they got 1,000,000 followers. They filmed themselves singing and dancing outside the US Immigration office to help one of their members applications.
Their visa application content is rather silly/absurd:
For a Youtube influencer I can see them meet 3 of the criteria by showing their influence on others, money earned, Youtube awards for viewership (by Google!). Maybe some platforms lend themselves more to being used for this sort of evidence than others.
- Evidence of a record of major commercial or critically acclaimed successes in the performing arts, as shown by box office receipts or record, cassette, compact disk, or video sales
- Evidence of significant recognition for achievements from organizations, government agencies, or other recognized experts in the field
- Evidence of having commanded a high salary or other significantly high remuneration for services in relation to others
A lot of youtube influencers are damn good at entertainment though, and a lot of “traditional media” entertainers are truely horrid. Ever seen a reality tv show? lol
...or anything with a laugh track? I tried some show a couple years back and was shocked to find that those still exist. I discovered it's a great signal of a show that I would not want to watch.
It's maybe slightly less trivial to do, but still incredibly common to buy awards, recognition, press releases, positive reviews and commentary in publications.
You might be shocked to find out how much the performers being written about in magazines or discussed on TV shows is a direct line to the production company promoting them. Similar for awards.
> You might be shocked to find out how much the performers being written about in magazines or discussed on TV shows is a direct line to the production company promoting them. Similar for awards.
I mean Payola as a term literally came from bribing DJs on radio stations to play your / your artist's music.
> > advertisements, press releases, publications contracts, or endorsements
> > box office receipts or record, cassette, compact disk, or video sales
> > Evidence of having commanded a high salary or other significantly high remuneration for services in relation to others
I fail to see the distinction you are trying to draw. Commercial value and celebrity has always been one of the metrics of "achievement".
The overall gist is that the visa application should be someone who is not easily replaced by an existing local worker that can generate similar value.
Extraordinary ability in the field of arts means distinction. Distinction means a high level of achievement in the field of arts evidenced by a degree of skill and recognition substantially above that ordinarily encountered to the extent that a person described as prominent is renowned, leading, or well-known in the field of arts.
Extraordinary ability in the field of science, education, business, or athletics means a level of expertise indicating that the person is one of the small percentage who have arisen to the very top of the field of endeavor.
Extraordinary achievement with respect to motion picture and television productions, as commonly defined in the industry, means a very high level of accomplishment in the motion picture or television industry evidenced by a degree of skill and recognition significantly above that ordinarily encountered to the extent that the person is recognized as outstanding, notable, or leading in the motion picture or television field.
> The O-1 visa is a temporary work visa designated for individuals who have achieved and sustained national or international acclaim for extraordinary ability in the sciences, arts, education, business or athletics, or individuals who have demonstrated a record of extraordinary achievement in the motion picture and television industries.
> O-1 Extraordinary Ability visa status is reserved for those who are among the small percentage of experts who have risen to the top of their field. The approval of an O-1 petition by the United States Citizenship & Immigration Services (USCIS) decides whether an individual qualifies for O-1 classification. This classification requires a substantial amount of evidence. The O-1 is a very complicated visa category subject to high levels of scrutiny by the U.S. government. Due to the complexity, the O-1 visa is used very infrequently.
At what point do we ever ask ourselves -- "what kind of culture do we want to create for the future of our country?" I don't think a pro soccer player is comparable to an onlyfans contributor. I would much prefer my future kids to be inspired by Cristiano Ronaldo than someone baring themselves on camera.
What's wrong with an OnlyFans contributor? It's a self-employed job that services a demand within the economy and pays taxes. It's pretty close to the ideal job an immigrant can have since the product is already globalized but the revenue is not - i.e. an OnlyFans influencer with an American audience who moves to America is now bringing that income back into the economy via taxes and spending, or if they have an international audience they are attracting foreign dollars into your economy and strengthening your currency position.
Extracting money from horny young men with an illusion of intimacy/friendship just doesn't seem ethical. Or good for society as a whole.
Especially when you've got streamers using sites like Twitch, aimed at younger gamers, promoting their OnlyFans porn.
The regular porn industry is bad enough (https://traffickinghub.com/), but at least the content is non-interactive, there's no pretence of friendship/connection.
Sex work (OF or otherwise) is unsavory, that's what. You can't stop it but there's zero reason we should be going out of our way to grant visas to sex workers.
The comment you are replying to articulated, I think rather clearly, one reason why maybe we should.
I think what you actually mean is that the reasons not to ("sex work is unsavory") outweigh the reasons to ("sex work is going to happen anyway and if some of the people doing it move to the US then they will spend their money and pay their taxes in the US and contribute to the economy there").
Maybe you're right, maybe you're not, but I don't think you should say "there's zero reason" when in fact there obviously are reasons and you just think other countervailing reasons matter more.
If what you’re just concerned about people “baring themselves on camera” then they can continue to do that without emigrating to America and it would still affect your culture. The internet is global after all.
Also, it’s going to take more than a few thousand immigrants a year to affect the culture of a country as populous as America.
The internet is global, but having folks in our midst who make a living that way has more of an effect on our culture than if they are just on the internet.
I actually worked in the adult industry earlier in my career so have a better insight than most. and I can tell you that these models are just normal people like you an I. They aren’t interested in corrupting your children nor throwing wild sex parties in public spaces.
Just because they don't have ill intent doesn't mean the fact that some of the most highly paid members of our society being sex workers sends a message about what kind of skills and assets are valuable, and which aren't as valuable.
Unfortunately that ship has already sailed and immigration wasn’t the reason.
It turns out that American citizens can work in the adult industry too and it’s not just immigrants who are capable of earning money from getting naked on camera. ;)
> They aren’t interested in corrupting your children nor throwing wild sex parties in public spaces.
RFK Jr., the current top health official in the US, is not interested in harming children either, and thinks he is doing a good public service: what is the reality though?
Last time I checked, “cam girls” don’t run the country. So I don’t think you can make a comparison there.
Plus the issues with JFK Jr are specific to him. It’s a bit of a stretch to imply that his view points are in any way related to his exposure pornography. That is unless “brain work” is some kind of euphemism I’m unaware of ;)
> One's intentions and the results of one's actions can be two different things.
Those articles mention just as many positives as negatives.
Porn isn’t inherently bad. It’s like alcohol, exercise, and other past times: moderation is the key.
Humans can get addicted to any kind of behaviour. The absolute worst thing you can do is make a topic a taboo because then you cannot keep people safe. This is as true for pornography as it is for weightlifting.
And frankly, hadn’t you got better things to do than worry about what consenting adults do in their private lives? It’s all a bit silly and prudish don’t you think?
i mean you said it yourself, the internet is global. those few thousand can have impressions of hundreds of millions. whether they do their cam shows abroad or local matters little. it's the inherent incentivization approved by a government that leads to deeper cultural erosion. if you're in a poor country with no access to education, and your only way into the US is porn, then that's what will ultimately win, rather than incentivizing higher education, etc. And before an argument is made that this will just be a way to get in and then those folks will go and seek PHDs and be productive members of society--i have a bridge to sell you.
If a person immigrates to the USA due to success with onlyfans, are they not productive members of society by virtue of having taxable & disposable income from the fruits of their labor? They don't need a PHD to be productive anymore than a soccer player, mentioned earlier. In reality we already have American citizens in the US paying for their college degrees via onlyfans.
Sex sells and everybody knows that. Why should the government use antiquated-at-best moral codes to discriminate against people who will increase the global influence of the country? Cultural exportation and exploitation have been key to US soft power for nearly a century.
crack also sells, amongst many other things that are inherently horrible for broad modern society.
> Why should the government use antiquated-at-best moral codes to discriminate against people who will increase the global influence of the country
this is a very loaded statement that assumes that everyone is in agreement that proliferating and rewarding cam models is some kind of inherent good. there's nothing antiquated morally with simply not rewarding it. i'm not stating to ban it outright. there's always use in it at the long tail of society
> The problem with social taboos is rarely a moral one, and usually more that people feel embarrassed or scared to be open and honest.
And usually that stems from others being unreasonably judgmental.
You're using broad sweeping statements to argue with a point that I'm not even making.
First off, you're only assuming I'm making this argument because I don't have an interest in adult entertainment. I just don't believe it needs to be shoved into every facet of society. The industry certainly _does_ exist in the long tail, because there's literally nothing interesting in it aside from the fact that people use it to get off and move on with their lives. It's like taking a dump. Everyone does it, but I don't need to sit around a dinner table discussing it as if it's some high brow art. And I certainly don't want people to be treated extra specially because they excel at taking dumps.
I see no difference in Cristiano Ronaldo and a porn star and an influencer and whatever you name it. They are all idols that sell stories for people to project their own thoughts and desires onto and get emotional. I would be more worry about my kid believing in celebrities, regardless of who they are.
And the American mainstream culture is filthy anyway. As the old French joke once said the difference of yogurt and the us is that if you leave yogurt for a coupled of hundred years they would develop culture.
You do aware of being best in sport and what I just said are hella two different things right?
I wish my kids aware that *hell is other people*. Otherwise being a porn star or being a sport star makes not so much difference. Both can give you mental struggles and physical injuries.
I think the another comment articulate it well too.
Edit: And sure It's concerning that the society being shallow but OF and porn are just consequences not the cause. Without them we would have something else to turn important human experience(ie sex) into a commercial show and twisted it. Turn humans into tradable goods. Body commodification is just moral decay and the end of civilization! I think we already have such a thing called ... sports?
Edit: professional sports
I mean, this is purely for socially constructed morality reasons.
In actuality, both require you to sell your body, and both can have long standing health effects. If anything, I would say the typical OF model sells their body much less than an athlete. I mean, I don't think they're going to tear their ACL.
And also, both offer no real tangible value to humanity. Sports do not produce anything, neither does porn, they're purely for entertainment. A cashier at McDonalds is providing more absolute value to the world than even the most esteemed athlete.
That's not to say that athletes are bad, entertainment and games are important. But you can't just say one form of mindless entertainment is more valuable than another form.
I don't know if you'd want to marry a porn star, and if not, that should tell you what he difference is. This is one of those things which is "freedom" in theory but has many second order effects in practice.
As much as I don't want to marry a porn star I don't want to marry a professional sports player.
And you know what? Just because these people are allowed into a country doesn't mean the local residents want to marry them.(The reverse ironically works tho)
The point is either reject all of them or treat them all equally.
It's certainly a very profitable industry, I don't see why they wouldn't want it. Outside of "eww icky" type reasoning, which as I've said, I don't think is important or worth humoring.
Everyone thinks rome will fall because of promiscuity. I just don't buy that weak morals, whatever that may mean, has a negative effect on society. Ultimately, these people do not hurt anyone and they push a lot of money into the economy.
It's just mindless entertainment. And, on the topic of skills: skills mean nothing. Being skilled is not enough, you have to be skilled at the right things.
Think of it this way: the skill of putting a ball through a hoop is one that is, objectively, worthless. There's no situation in modern life, or frankly even prehistoric life, where that skill would help you or create value.
It has value because we say so. We say "people want to watch this". If you take away the people watching, then the skill is beyond worthless. Worth less than even talking. Now, parallel this to porn, and you will see it's the same situation.
> A cashier at McDonalds is providing more absolute value to the world than even the most esteemed athlete.
Do you actually believe this or are you just ragebaiting?
> That's not to say that athletes are bad, entertainment and games are important. But you can't just say one form of mindless entertainment is more valuable than another form.
Sport isn't mindless entertainment--that's just objectively false. The "dumb" entertainment you're speaking of is built _around_ sports (e.g gambling) while physical competition is as old as time. Porn is also the exact opposite of this. It's just a byproduct of entertainment and boredom/vice. For sports, humans have pushed themselves to the extreme limit through discipline for a millennia--which inspires many, creates stronger people, gets some out of poverty, or depression, or countless other things. The fact that you're comparing porn to sports or the most esteemed athletes to random low level cashiers at McDonalds in value creation for society tells me you're an advanced troll and I already just spent too much time replying.
I'm not a troll, we just disagree. Sports and games are mindless entertainment.
Yes, competition is important - but it doesn't produce anything. If I win a game, I haven't won anything other than the ability to say I've won the game. I didn't produce a good, I didn't cook food or blow glass.
Now, entertainment does create value around it. Taking attention can be used for advertising and admission. But the exact same thing is true of porn, and to the same if not greater extent.
I also don't buy the whole "discipline" angle. Yes, sports are hard and take practice. But you're making a morality argument. Just because something takes blood, sweat and tears doesn't mean it's good. Eating a couch takes discipline, too, just ask that one guy on My Strange Addiction.
The only reason, and I do mean only reason, we view porn as less valuable is because we think it's icky. That's it. But I don't particularly think that's a strong argument for anything.
just entertainment? Aton of people just watch sports to shout at the TV (or field) and drink beer. A lot more than are genuinely interested in the physical performance.
And really, we absolutely glorify entertainment in our society. People look up more to Kim Kardashian or a Will Smith than a king. Athletes also but more because they bring in the "win" which is more entertainment. It's all about making you feel good about winning or the chance of it, and the Idea that you're part of it.
Well I don't know much about French aside from the joke but Cannes obviously has way better taste than Hollywood.
The neat part is, with social media and global internet, culture are generally degenerating regardless of countries. If I were American citizen(gladly Im not) I might as well just let them in to get some tax money, and potentially see if the industry can be used as a soft propaganda machine. Just like Hollywood.
There are hundreds of small film festivals all over the United States each year. The biggest that I know is probably Sundance Film Festival. They have just as much "taste" (whatever that means) as Cannes (Film Festival). France also produces lots of shitty French language films that never leave the French-speaking world. Canal+ is the gold standard for French language film production.
film nerds gonna films nerds. What I mean was Plame vs Oscar since bro was asking mainstream sorry for the confusion. And just bcz French do shit movies too doesn't invalidate the statement sadly. Don't get me wrong. Nor do I think French is that superior.
The other replies to this show a form of argumentation that's always fascinated me.
You say "We should encourage X over Y" and the retorts are
* "Y will still exist"
* "Y can still be encouraged separately"
* "You should tell me the difference between X and Y"
* "Hey, I found an X that sometimes acts vaguely similar to Y!"
None directly disagree with the original point, but they do imply fault in the original reasoning without providing any proof or requiring any effort.
The third one is a classic, the straw man. A concise implication of error in which a good-faith response would be long-winded and boring comparatively.
To what end?
What are they hoping to get out of disagreeing with someone trying to encouraging our future culture to be one of relative wholesomeness?
... Why take the time out of one's day to say "well... encouraging X is great and all but you know what's better? passive-aggressively working against anyone that suggests it."?
It is disappointing that it is so easy to bamboozle HNers with a straw man argument.
The original poster was clearly not making an analogy between professional soccer and only fans creators.
To be explicit, the comparisons were:
Cinematic actors -> TikTok creators
Victoria’s Secret model -> only fans creator
Pro soccer -> esports
I fail to see how the culture of our country will be negatively impacted by any of those changes. Comparing Cristiano Renaldo to OnlyFans is a straw man because that specific comparison was never suggested, except by the “rebuttal”
I don't believe the rigidity of the comparisons matter within the broad context of my point. Regardless of whether OP didn't directly compare pro soccer to OF, the point is that allowing the degradation of expectations of Visas will only incentivize low effort crap. And yes, one can sit here and argue all day that OF fans, or TikTok creators are the same thing as Victorias secret models or Cinematic actors (and I would argue that's far from true) but I think most of us can all feel societal erosion happening and the decline of average IQs and the fact that a huge generation of growing young adults can barely read. Let's not pretend this has nothing to do with multiple epidemics like porn addiction, gambling, and general disregard of trying to better yourself because 90% of people are using 80% of their days staring at said TikTok creators
> but I think most of us can all feel societal erosion happening and the decline of average IQs and the fact that a huge generation of growing young adults can barely read. Let's not pretend this has nothing to do with multiple epidemics like porn addiction, gambling, and general disregard of trying to better yourself because 90% of people are using 80% of their days staring at said TikTok creators
None of this is true, but boy, it sure does feel good to believe.
I wish you, and people in general, would be more willing to look for something like truth instead of whatever feels good at the moment.
I think before we suggest whether policy is good or bad, we need to agree on the meaning of vague terms like "societal erosion." What about society is eroding? You mention IQ and literacy. What about tolerance, open-mindedness, compassion, equality, financial success... Some of these things are going up and some are going down. Are there other dimension to "societal erosion?"
i do think it's important to define what a healthy society looks like, but I'm going to guess everyone will have a very different answer. It's a topic that likely doesn't have any kind of straightforward response with unanimous agreement.
I would argue that beyond basics like food, shelter and protection of human rights, we should strive for more noble pursuits as society. I'm not even religious whatsoever, but I think the proliferation of certain vices like sex/gambling/drugs is probably a net negative for society. They certainly have their roles in the long tail, but overall a society that is caught up in rampant dopamine chasing is a distracted, doomed society. We should always be yearning. We should be paving a road that is a better one for our future generations. Societal erosion is creating short term profit/happiness at the expense of long term thinking. America has become the king of this. You can see it everywhere, from the types of businesses people create (e.g pyramid schemes in the form of courses, or the shovel makers that create businesses to proliferate said pyramid schemes) to what is currently valued by the growing generation. I can keep going and going, but I'll leave it here. I hope I somewhat made my point. I'm sure many will disagree, and that is why this country is on its way downwards. The few smart will own and create a lot of value for themselves, we'll likely have a few trillionaires, and the majority will be bumbling idiots that can barely read. We're not there yet, but we're well on the way there
it's low iq pedantry/contrarianism that pervades the tech industry that i refuse to engage with. it's exactly the same people that will bikeshed every feature into the abyss. i agree and appreciate your sentiment.
It's not "just entertainment". We want extraordinary athletes and musicians to inspire people and show them what humans are capable of. Extraordinary prostitutes are generally not inspiring people in the way that most people probably would like society to move. It's fine to place different amounts of cultural value on these things and not remain neutral about the worth of all possible human endeavors.
When someone describes themselves as an "influencer", it is entirely appropriate to ask what sort of influence they're having, and whether we want that.
Lots of extraordinary athletes are not good role models, yet we still grant them O1 visas. Many of them have many children to different women and are terrible fathers. To me, influencers are like the athletes of the attention economy. In the old world (20+ years ago, before iPhones), media was much more tightly controlled. It was harder to get famous. Now with mobile Internet, a new, parallel fame hierarchy that appeared. To me, most influencers seem like popular people from high school, but they use social media to extend their reach and shelf-life.
+1. While supreme court defines the likes of porn as freedom of expression, it's a different thing for a country to want different kinds of professions to be more common through its immigration system.
While I know you wrote this in jest, you raise a very good point! A lot of people with STEM jobs unwind after a long day by watching or listening to comedy -- TV, film, stand-up, YouTube, whatever. I have no issue with it. Also, lots of them go home and play video games. That is another form of entertainment (fun).
I guess the question is why do virtual/internet stars need to be in the US? Actors or musicians would have primarily performed live or been recorded live, in US cities. But an OF model? Why does this person need to be physically located in the US at all? What is the benefit to the person, or to the US?
> What is the benefit to the person, or to the US?
Not that I encourage it but... Obviously an OF model moving to the US means US users viewing that person now stop sending money abroad. And people from all over the world watching that model now send money to the US.
It's not just tax revenues: it's shifting the balance of money in the US's favor. If an OF model makes $10m a year and pays $2m in taxes, it's not just $2m in tax revenues for the US: it's also in addition to that $8m that are now spent/staying in the US.
Benefit to the person is probably a path to citizenship and more economic opportunities (especially since being a camgirl is a young person’s career with almost no long-term prospects)
Benefit to the USA, being generous, is that those earnings of the camgirl may then be spent in the US instead of flowing overseas. At least some of it will.
Critics would rightly point out though that importing thousands of camgirls increases demand for apartments (and even more than the typical person because I bet they’re less likely to live with roommates than a typical woman of the same age) and we have a massive housing crisis in all cities. Maybe if the camgirls want to move to the rust belt or something, it could still work out net positive.
> Benefit to the person is probably a path to citizenship
As I understand it, from an O-1 visa (a temporary one that needs to be renewed every year after the third), the next step is the Employment-Based Immigration: First Preference EB-1 visa.
> You may be eligible for an employment-based, first-preference visa if you are an alien of extraordinary ability, are an outstanding professor or researcher, or are a certain multinational executive or manager. Each occupational category has certain requirements that must be met ...
An OF model isn't likely to fall under the "outstanding professors and researchers" or the "certain multinational executive"... so we're going with the extraordinary ability criteria.
> You must meet at least 3 of the 10 criteria* below, or provide evidence of a one-time achievement (i.e., Pulitzer, Oscar, Olympic Medal) as well as evidence showing that you will be continuing to work in the area of your expertise. No offer of employment or labor certification is required.
Thanks for the research. I didn't know that at all. I guess the main path to citizenship then is getting a green card and citizenship by marriage. That's a very real possibility which wouldn't be nearly as easy to do if you were working from Russia or Colombia.
I assume that foreign influencers (Instagram, YouTube, OF) mostly move to two places: (1) Los Angeles or (2) Miami. Both have great weather and large networks of people in similar industry.
I would like to point out the long term prospects part may not be true for high earners. Some models make a senior software engineers annual salary in a matter of months. Many of these people can retire and live off investments at age 35.
Perfectly fair point! Although when I've seen OF stats published the median model makes like $1,000 a year or something. So I think if you took even the top 5,000 models out of the computation, most of them are not earning enough to pay for a nice lifestyle in the moment, let alone funding retirement by the time their beauty declines.
What I think is more likely to happen though with an immigrant OF model (who isn't in that elite earning tier) is that she meets a partner in the US, which affords her an exit strategy if she doesn't want to (or can't) keep doing OF forever.
The benefit to the person is going to vary. For one reason or another they prefer to be in US rather than wherever they currently are. I'm sure each person has their own unique set of reasons, but it's not hard to imagine.
A benefit for the US is increased GDP, tax revenue, etc.
What is the average turnover/tenure of a camgirl? I'd think that most popular camgirls come and go pretty quickly, such that giving them visas that were formerly reserved for performing musicians would not necessarily make sense.
I can think of maybe two musicians who might be said to fit in that tight intersection.
Brian May (guitarist from Queen) who has an astrophysics PhD from Imperial College London
Professor Brian Cox who teaches Physics at Manchester University and is a public face of science of tv here in the UK was keyboardist for one-hit-wonder band d-reem who had a hit in the 90s with “Things can only get better”.
Brian May is really the only one who is a superstar musician but Brian Cox is a more significant scientist.
I think back when it was just actors, musicians, athletes, etc. it was in a time when there were gatekeepers for whether or not those people had any actual talent in an art.
Whether or not those gatekeepers were right is another matter, but there was some guy in an office in a skyscraper who you had to impress, and if you did, you could get in.
Now, that guy's effectively gone. Aiden Ross, Jack Doherty - that kind of guy - couldn't have impressed a big wig. But now, they don't have to. They have to make people pay attention to them on YouTube/Instagram/TikTok/Twitch, and that's it. And they do that and they can get people to give them insane money to do so because they want access to that audience. Quality doesn't matter anymore.
> Does anyone know on which work visa do models come in then? It can’t be H1B…
The H-1B1 visa is the one that we're mostly familiar with. Specialist occupations that require "[t]heoretical and practical application of a body of highly specialized knowledge and [a]ttainment of a bachelor's or higher degree in a directly related specific specialty (or its equivalent) as a minimum for entry into the occupation in the United States."
The H-1B2 visa is for DOD Researcher and Development Project Worker.
The H-1B3 visa is for... Fashion Model
> The position/services must require a fashion model of prominence.
> To be eligible for this visa category you must be a fashion model of distinguished merit and ability.
For what it's worth, as a O-1 scientist you have to provide evidence that you:
...are a member of scholarly/professional organizations;
...have published original research works scientifically and internationally (peer reviewed publications);
...that you have judged the work of others (supervised and/or examined Ph.D. candidates);
...that you have consulted to governments;
...that you have repeatedly been invited as guest speaker at conferences, trade fairs or universities;
...that you won major international scholarships and awards (e.g. best paper awards at conferences, Masters's/doctoral scholarships from prestigious universities like Oxford, Cambridge, Harvard or MIT;
...that three referees that are themselves O-1 level equivalents deem you worthy of receiving O-1 status;
...that you are a named inventor on patent applications and granted patents;
...that you have received media coverage;
...that you abilities are reflected in higher than typical compensation/salary/remuneration;
...that you won major international scholarships and awards (e.g. best paper awards at conferences, Masters's/doctoral scholarships from prestigious universities like Oxford, Cambridge, Harvard or MIT; or
...that you have published significant works (i.e., works that created impact through citations, business creation, or software systems using the methods described therein).
Usually, from an official ist similar to the above (which I re-wrote from memory here), three out of nine or so checkboxes is the lowest bar for an O-1, and if you tick all of them and work with a specialist law firm, then it should be a slam dunk; my O-1 took about six months from application to grant back in 2008 (no payments of any "expediting fees" if they exist were made as far as I know).
arguably the O-1B is more necessary than the O-1A. If you didn't have an O-1B you couldn't have a bjork come and give a concert in the US and get paid for it, you couldn't have an emma thompson come and shoot for a hollywood film and get paid for it, you couldn't hold ANY major international sporting events, etc.
I personally find this opinion typical of HN readers, and I argue that successful influencers/pretty-people can easily beat more serious professions in terms of economic value, because the vast majority of people are more human than the average HN reader.
It'd be fun to see a filter similar to [dead] where you could just blissfully ignore these baity throwaway accounts.
edit: ironically to the person using a throwaway to yell racial slurs under me I do browse with [dead] visible because I find some of them amusing, more amusing than most of the throwaways even, though the funniest ones have seemingly stopped posting.
You may argue that these people aren't of such import, but I would beg to differ. This is the future of culture. These people shape the culture that the young people around you consume. They create the memes of six-seven-ification.
Influencers as the future of culture is not great. Hollywood had a ton of issues but it at least had some... class? If you watch an interview with Mr. Beast or other famous influencers they are concerningly ignorant, have little self-awareness and a child-like approach to reality. It makes total sense given these are teenagers who were lauded with fame for entertaining other teenagers on social media.
I watched the Mr. Beast episode of David Letterman's show, and I had no expectations but figured he must have some charisma as the most watched youtube person. He was unable to explain basic concepts, had no self-awareness, and generally seemed detached from any sort of reality. It was shocking to think that is who is shaping young peoples minds.
“but it at least had some... class”
Not if you’d have asked the WASPs at the time, they very much looedk down on Hollywood. Saw it as vulgar and beneath them for many of the same reasons people dislike MrBeast. The 'class' only came afterwards.
The movie industry was, for much of the 20th century, split between production in Hollywood and finance in New York.
Probably the last gasp of that was Marvel, where, for a long time, the merch and comic people in New York made the final decisions.
Hollywood actors being vapid idiots is a trope, or rather reality, as old as Hollywood. Every time they go on Letterman they have to carefully follow the script written for them to avoid embarrassing themselves and the industry. And they often fail at that.
BTW, actors are very often prostitutes. Have been since ancient times and the association has stuck. Mediterranean yachts are packed full of C-lister actresses/hookers. Not to mention most of them get jobs by sleeping with producers, which is just an indirect form of prostitution. I don't know about you, but classy is the last way I'd describe Jennifer Lawrence sucking Weinstein's dick.
> Hollywood had a ton of issues but it at least had some... class?
It looked that way because they had media training and their public personas were carefully managed, with staged interviews and media appearances. Behind the scenes, it’s a different story.
Influencers are rewarded for seeming authentic. Mr Beast coming across badly in a traditional TV interview just makes his audience think he’s more real.
I think things like "classiness," "grace," and "tact" are all but dead, both in Hollywood and across the population. Everyone seems to be mentally teenagers, but in middle-age bodies.
I understand this sentiment. When I look at my own life, one culture constant has been the decline of "formalism" -- dress, language, jobs, inter-generational relationships, privacy. If anything, the average YouTuber is a pretty average person -- not too good looking, not too well coached by a PR team, not too well dressed. Isn't this a cultural "win" because we are getting more authentic content, instead of ~10 major TV networks and film studios deciding who we should watch?
Yep. But give it a few decades for the money to figure out how to wall off outsiders, insulate their little cadres of influencers and firm up networks of fake and real methods to direct popularity.
Still - probably better than Hollywood in the long run, and more accessible, even in the hellish direction it will undoubtedly go.
When I was a kid, I used to world WWF (World Wrestling Federation) with my best friend. We loved the interviews (pre/post "fight"). Those guys were idiots and certainly "detached from any sort of reality", but also very funny to 10 year old boys! I also liked Jean-Claude Van Damme movies. I turned out just fine.
To use anecdotes of specific influencers or even to cultural short/med-term memes misses the OP’s fundamental point in saying
> “this is the future of culture”.
The point is that the future of “culture” is increasingly decentralized; that the ability or more aptly, the opportunity, to accumulate “cultural influence” will tend towards higher entropy as a direct repercussion to the proliferation of the means to accumulate it.
Put differently, as the hardware and software used to record, store, and share content become more widely accessible, anyone with the access and motivation to use the tools truly has the opportunity to become famous.
'Class','taste' etc these are all very subjective. One could argue that Mr Beast built all of his fame from scratch and didnt have it handed to him or having to sleep with some powerful gatekeeper - something you can't say about all your 'classy' hollywood stars. If you go back a century you can probably find people kvetching about the lack of class of these new fangled movie people compared to the theater stars of their day (who actually had to know how to act)
If one of America's main exports is culture, why would you ban factor inputs?
They're also not fungible and extremely mobile. People get attached to specific OF stars and the medium inherently requires remote work. So it's an inherently global labour force that protectionism won't help. American OF models won't magically make more money if you ban immigration unless you also ban cultural imports.
The government isn't displacing local talent by importing OF models and gets tax dollars for essentially doing nothing. Those tax dollars pay for schools/hospitals/etc.
OF also skews towards young, unmarried women, which balances the gender surplus of unmarried men that generally tries to immigrate. Since they're young, they also have more productivity before drawing on benefits like Medicare or Social Security.
By any objective standard OF models are the ideal migrant.
This seems more like importing culture. These content creators aren't coming to work or American creators, they are coming to America to create their content for American audiences or using American resources.
...I get this is HN but come on. It is just modern day JasminCam for lonely men that are being exploited through parasocial relationships. It is the opposite of productive. You just have society feeding on itself.
Isn’t that a derogatory stereotype? Aren’t those men (and women and other folks) as “exploited” as a reader of a book or a player of a game, who understands they’re about to be a part of a fantasy but willingly suspend the disbelief for a short while?
It’s only exploitation if this suspension of disbelief is artificially prolonged in nefarious way, with a self-reinforcing fantasy so the person loses touch with the reality and spends increasingly unhealthy amounts of time in a fantasy, or otherwise get conditioned and start to exhibit addiction-like behaviors that aren’t in their best long-term interests.
That happens (every entertainment industry has its whales), but saying it’s the norm (rather than a pathological extremity) is sort of stigmatizing.
Consent does not bless immoral acts or neutralize damage. A person who takes a drug voluntarily is still being harmed by it. It causes changes in the consumer whether he likes it or not. Causality does not care about your consent.
(And to address your analogy to books, the content of a work of fiction also matters. Reading bad books isn't good for your mind either. But literary fiction at least has the potential to be good. The genre isn't categorically bad.)
And porn is addictive. Porn addiction is extremely widespread and afflicts mostly young men. Porn's ubiquity and the easy with which it can be accessed has created a situation that did not exist before, and from a young age. And not only is it addictive, but it does real psychological damage to these consumers, creating what some call "porn brain". It is an excellent method for producing sexually-crippled creeps and incels unable - and even uninterested, given the nature of their "fantasy" - to have healthy relationships with real human beings, and the stats corroborate this.
It is an incredibly twisted and deranging vice. It destroys individuals and has a destructive impact on society as a whole.
> A person who takes a drug voluntarily is still being harmed by it. It causes changes in the consumer whether he likes it or not.
I’m afraid you’re oversimplifying it. If only things would be this simple. They just never are.
Every experience causes changes (it’s the whole point). And every stimulating experience has a potential to skew your behaviors towards having more of it. Some more, some less, of course, but anything can become a passion and get unhealthy so.
There’s this fine distinction between someone who does something now and then, without significant impairment to their decision-making abilities that cause over-favoring such actions, and those who fail to notice it in time and become overtly obsessed with something.
It’s not about what you do - you can be watching porn or going hiking (or whatever most people would naively deem “good”) - anything can become unhealthy.
I think I understand your point, though. Indeed, pornography consumption nature is intimate and that leaves less opportunities for feedback and self-introspection. That is, noticing the point it becomes more of an obsession. However, dismissing it under a simple “porn is bad” (a tempting idea) is short-sighted by dismissing any nuances, and also harmful - just in different ways (through stigmatization).
I am going to push back here. I follow a variety of YouTubers, and I'm pretty sure that I have a parasocial relationship with most of them. I never heard the term before I watched a Tom Scott video about it. It made perfect sense me, and I saw it in myself. Literally, sometimes I talk to the screen, like we're in the room together. But it's only entertainment, and it's a fun way to "escape" after a long day at the office. I don't take it too seriously. Am I being exploited by a channel of funny people in their 20/30s who fix cars, or lift weights, or talk about relationship problems? I don't think so.
Are all transactions on OF inherently a parasocial relationship? If a dude wants to jerk his schmeat to somebody he thinks is attractive, and pays for access to the media without otherwise engaging, is that parasocial?
You could do that for free. Most are obviously looking for more.
It kind of sounds like you are trying to justify whatever it is you are doing, in which case you do you. I don't actually care what you do and neither should you care what I think.
> You could do that for free. Most are obviously looking for more.
And everyone can use Pornhub for free, yet Pornhub still makes money on their premium subscriptions. Are those also parasocial relationships?
> It kind of sounds like you are trying to justify whatever it is you are doing, in which case you do you.
You know I thought about putting the obligatory "I don't use OF" in my first comment, but felt it wouldn't be necessary. I see that it was; by the way have you stopped beating your wife?
There is a reason why "the oldest profession" is a polite idiom for prostitution.
Calling it "parasocial", doesn't change what it is, but the technology as a mediator does. And society has been feeding on itself since we moved past hunter gatherers.
>It is just modern day JasminCam for lonely men that are being exploited through parasocial relationships. It is the opposite of productive.
You can make all the moral judgments you like, but the fact is: They're making money either way, and then spending that money in their local communities. They can spend that money (and pay taxes on it) in the US or not.
It's no different economically than a musician or an actor doing the same.
> why Hollywood became the Earth's center of cultural gravity post-WW2
The reason why Hollywood even exists is because it was a way of escaping the enforcement of patents and royalties. And it is easy being the cultural center of the western world when everything other cultural-relevant city in the western hemisphere is somewhat in ruins. Other than that, the lettering is a racist monument of a bygone era.
> You may argue that these people aren't of such import, but I would beg to differ
I'm not a US citizen, but lets face it - there is some irony in seeing some scientists fleeing for abroad offers, some probably deported, and having influencers or glorified strippers benefiting from some ill-thought program.
> These people shape the culture that the young people around you consume.
Do you have kids? I do. People don't give 2 f** about Hollywood or their "stars". Maybe in america. We have our own clowns here, and 15 minutes of fame doesn't require being predated on by some director (thankfully). My daughter couldn't name a single actor even if she wanted to - because movies are (mostly) dead, and series are a commodity. And I'm not saying this as some weirdo who doesn't own a TV or something - we have Disney, SkyShowTime, HBO, Amazon, etc. Its just "kids dont care about that anymore".
> They create the memes of six-seven-ification
So, do you know what that means exactly? Are you a Skrilla’s fan? Just asking, because from the tone of your response, you seem to have no idea of the meaning - just like kids saying "theez nuts" or whatever.
Another reason why US media is so dominant: It has the largest population of any English-majority speaking nation. Another thing: English is the second language for an large portion of people under 40 in the world.
I remember when I first learned about the size of the Japenese media market (TV, film, music). It is ENORMOUS. I could not understand how, as 99% of Japanese language speakers live in Japan. Then I realised that Japan is highly developed (wealthy) and has a huge internal market of ~120 million people.
> My daughter couldn't name a single actor even if she wanted to
I doubt it. You should ask her. If she is 10 years or older, she certainly has some favourites. If she has social media, ask her who she follows. I am sure there are a bunch of actors & actresses in her list. I'm not saying this to pass any judgement on you as a parent. Only that I doubt the authenticity of your statement.
> I doubt it. You should ask her. If she is 10 years or older, she certainly has some favourites. If she has social media, ask her who she follows. I am sure there are a bunch of actors & actresses in her list
16 and nope, she doesnt really care about actors/actresses as she doesnt really follow tv/cinema/streaming; she consumes mostly youtube,f1 and korean stuff. From what I've seen, this is not uncommon.
I disagree. I think the attention economy is a new, parallel universe of fame. Yes, old Hollywood and new social media interact and affect each other, but they are still fairly independent. Most Hollywood actors don't have a very large social media presence -- it is probably mostly managed by their PR team. And few social media influencers make it in Hollywood as actors or actresses.
I have no judgement on these models. Everyone can make money through legal means as they deem fit.
But at the same time, the immigration system historically penalized anyone who engages in prostitution and actively denied entry to people found to be engaged in it. There is an explicit question about this in all immigration forms. Which is why it’s surprising that O-1 visas are being awarded to OnlyFans models. Maybe OF isn’t prostitution according to how it’s being interpreted, but it’s very surprising.
Well Sweden sure thinks it could be a form of prostitution. While
Some form of OF is similar to pornography (pre recorded shows) other is similar to prostitution and therefore illegal (paying for custom live sexual acts). Obviously Sweden isn’t US, but it’s not as clear as “OF is just porn”.
Idk if you mean it literally but conflating the sort of prostitution they ask about on immigration forms with taking naked pictures of yourself seems very wrong.
Disclaimer: I don't mean this comment as an insult to you or anyone else here. It's meant to be slightly tongue in cheek.
I hate to be that person, but the fact that so many people on HN think OF is prostitution is revealing of the site's demographics (i.e. older). It is, as some may put it, boomer thinking.
You're misunderstanding what these people - esports athletes, successful streamers, influencers, OF models etc - actually do. They create and maintain parasocial relationships.
The point isn't just the gameplay or nudes / sex videos or commentary. For e.g., I (and a bunch of other young women for some reason) love to watch Temet https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=go8EJbNaIHg while working. It's the way they reflect back to their audience and allow them to become a part of their performance.
It's kind of like the place where everyone knows your name? These are digital third places and the content (whether it be neon blue bunny hopping characters or a graphic video of someone having sex) is a mechanism for bonding / a part of the activity. Kind of like the alcohol at the pub, I suppose.
That's where real influence comes from in this age.
If you think OF is prostitution, you're fundamentally misunderstanding what will drive power and culture in this century.
There's a strong parasocial element to traditional prostitution, although it's used more by high-end "escorts" who deliberately cultivate conversational skills. So none of this is new.
"My default strategy was this: I would invite the man in, we’d sit down and talk for a while. I’d establish physical contact in the conversation by touching his hand when laughing at a joke, or crossing my leg so it bumped into his. I would become increasingly charmed, utterly fascinated by his life, and I asked him to explain to me concepts I already knew (remember, they like you smart in order to validate their identity as a man who likes smart women, and they still love teaching you things)."
It’s not the boomer thinking, it’s just mostly talking about semantics. Prostitution is defined as engaging in sexual activity in exchange for payment, which is frowned upon in the immigration system.
Is being in a sugar daddy/baby relationship a form prostitution? Is paying money for a custom private show online where the OF model performs all kinds of sexual acts prostitution? Does prostitution require physical contact? Thats the question of semantics that I am curious about re:immigration.
And these questions aren’t “Boomer mentality”. There is precedent in asking for clear definitions. Sweden makes a distinction between pre recorded only fans work, which is akin to pornography and custom shows which are criminalized, akin to prostitution. https://www.loc.gov/item/global-legal-monitor/2025-06-10/swe...
> I hate to be that person, but the fact that so many people on HN think OF is prostitution is revealing of the site's demographics (i.e. older). It is, as some may put it, boomer thinking.
Well it's not non-existent either, there are a fair number of onlyfans models (and also general actors in the field of pornography who do the same) who do escorting on the side.
The argument from cinema is flaky and a moral critique of Hollywood's influence is unavoidable. But we're talking about porn here, not cinema. This is decadence and depravity. How can you confuse cinema with the construction of an international whoredom? The numbers are also incommensurate.
And TikTok is the antithesis of culture. It's consumerist rubbish that encourages a vapid, thoughtless, and illiterate consumption of shallow material. The article even mentions the monetary motivations of those posting. Any gimmick will do just to make a buck.
Let us not relativize culture. If you relativize it, then your argument falls apart anyway. Authentic culture serves human beings. It involves learning from, developing, deepening, refining, and correcting what came before. Trash content doesn't do this. It is cultural poison. It ruins people's minds and wrecks society.
This use of O-1 visas is merely another sign of the downward trajectory of our polity. We are following Plato's description of social decline perfectly. Perhaps aesthetically, it is fitting that Trump is the poster boy of this abuse of O-1 visas, but he is at best an emanation and a catalyst of broader and deeper social and cultural processes. In the absence of a minimum of sound moral authority, you can expect the poison that lurks in the mud to hatch out and begin to dominate the polis.
>And TikTok is the antithesis of culture. It's consumerist rubbish that encourages a vapid, thoughtless, and illiterate consumption of shallow material. The article even mentions the monetary motivations of those posting. Any gimmick will do just to make a buck.
My brother, you've just described modern American culture perfectly.
> Let us not relativize culture. If you relativize it, then your argument falls apart anyway. Authentic culture serves human beings. It involves learning from, developing, deepening, refining, and correcting what came before. Trash content doesn't do this. It is cultural poison. It ruins people's minds and wrecks society.
I am sure there would have been people at the time decrying the creation of pigments and paints as the fall of civilization due to "decadence and depravity." Didn't matter much, did it?
> We are following Plato's description of social decline perfectly
Plato was a wrestler. Plato would like totally be a gym bro, bro.
It has been a while since I've read Republic, but I remember Book 8 differently. To quote the IEP,
Tyranny arises out of democracy when the desire for freedom to do what one wants becomes extreme (562b-c). The freedom or license aimed at in the democracy becomes so extreme that any limitations on anyone’s freedom seem unfair. Socrates points out that when freedom is taken to such an extreme it produces its opposite, slavery (563e-564a). The tyrant comes about by presenting himself as a champion of the people against the class of the few people who are wealthy (565d-566a). The tyrant is forced to commit a number of acts to gain and retain power: accuse people falsely, attack his kinsmen, bring people to trial under false pretenses, kill many people, exile many people, and purport to cancel the debts of the poor to gain their support (565e-566a). The tyrant eliminates the rich, brave, and wise people in the city since he perceives them as threats to his power (567c). Socrates indicates that the tyrant faces the dilemma to either live with worthless people or with good people who may eventually depose him and chooses to live with worthless people (567d). The tyrant ends up using mercenaries as his guards since he cannot trust any of the citizens (567d-e). The tyrant also needs a very large army and will spend the city’s money (568d-e), and will not hesitate to kill members of his own family if they resist his ways (569b-c).
This summary matches my recollection more closely than yours. Could you please quote primary sources on what exactly you mean by "Plato's description of social decline?"
But influencers are by default distributed and don't really need to be in a single place. Most of their collabs are in luxurious venues around the world (Because we live in a world worshipping rich stuff but that s another matter)
>These people shape the culture that the young people around you consume. They create the memes of six-seven-ification.
I'd disagree, six-seven-ification is caused by the human desire for clout and tribal motivations - I'd argue that social currency is the reason people pursue fiat currency; ask yourself this, if I have you $100 billion, but you could not interact with any human beings from then on, would that $100 billion still matter?
Rather than influencers forcing memes, "six-seven-ification" arises organically from the authors' pursuing of belonging/clout within a tribe. What I would say is more interesting is that the lifetime of such cultural outputs is becoming more and more fleeting.
For Millenials & gen X our memes seemed to have quite a bit of permanence over the years. For the boomers and silent generations before us, their cultures were even more static (and traditional) by comparison. For gen z/a it seems their cultural language changes month to month, sometimes week to week.
Memes aren't enjoyed for years now, they're enjoyed for a few months. Horizontally spinning rat, Coffin dance, etc are all ancient history now.
And you can see the reaction to this; there are spikes in search interest on a lot of classic (2005-2015) memes, Gen Z is desperately embracing retro tech like camcorders, polaroids and 90s/00s outfits in a snap back to reality. The gravity of this cannot be understated.
The title is misleading. It says “dominating” however no sources or percentages are provided. And later in the article it only says “increasingly applying”, with just two examples.
I do have a friend (very popular drummer-YouTuber who makes covers, has millions of subs) who did get an O visa because he actually is a, kinda, celebrity, so I guess this is indeed happening occasionally. But nothing is being “dominated” here.
To be clear: TFA is a thinly veiled legal services advertisement ("submarine" in HN parlance), so "dominated" is being used as a hype-generation / reality distortion term.
That said, the reality of today is so-called influencers and OF sex workers are now becoming a relevant fraction of applicants compared to the past where they represented 0%. Is it possible fixating on the word "dominating" a bit overly pedantic?
There is already a lot going on here without pedantry.
I would also note that, even if the title is accurate, and (say) 90% of applications are from social media influencers, it doesn't even make a claim about how many are granted. It could be that countless influencers are applying... and being rejected.
One of my past manager was on a O-1 (in a tech company); he was from india.
So, it goes like this, you register to be a presenter in a conference, copy some material from another tech talk and (re-)present it there as a novelty (rince and repeat). Pretty Simple. Step #2, create your facebook, youtube channel (etc.) and buy subscribers (from mediamister.com, getafollower.com, views4you.com, socialwick.com, buzzoid.com, etc) which is perfectly legal; he must have spent 10% of his salary to buy millions of subscribers; and that's how he's been working in tech for the past 10+ years.
Do you have evidence this was true? This sounds like a good story but I thought getting these visas was mostly about revenue receipts, and if he bought a lot of subscribers, they must've been subscribing to something that paid him.
Most of the scientists and engineers I know are on different visas. The US has gained a ton from being largely the cultural center of the world so it's good that there's a visa to take in cultural figures (even if I don't personally connect with influencer culture). As social media is new and fairly spread out, especially compared to traditional recipients like models and actors, it seems really unsurprising they are a ton of these now. I would say the problem is less we are taking in influencers and more we aren't accepting other people.
> The O-1 category includes the O-1A, which is designated for individuals with extraordinary ability in the sciences, education, business or athletics and the O-1B, reserved for those with “extraordinary ability or achievement”.
> My whole thing is being the funny Jewish girl with big boobs.
The O-1B category is broad because it's mostly entertainment based so there's more squishy room two of the requirements match a Top OF model though.
> Evidence of a record of major commercial or critically acclaimed successes in the performing arts, as shown by box office receipts or record, cassette, compact disk, or video sales
> Evidence of having commanded a high salary or other significantly high remuneration for services in relation to others
A high earning OF model ticks both of those boxes pretty easily. We don't want to put dollar amounts on it to only attract movie stars because other professions don't pay as well would be blocked out and an explicit filter on (heh) explicit O1 visas would be a content based restriction that would (or at least imo should) be a 1A infringement. [0]
People are getting hung up on definitions of extraordinary. The thing you need to understand is that US immigration is a political blackhole. The main pathways to immigrate to the US are family, misery (asylum, refugee, tps), or luck (diversity). Employment or economic immigration is frowned upon and visas like H-1B are limited and exploitative and still ultimately politically unpopular as the masses don't want to compete. So, that leaves O-1 as an escape hatch for a basic economic immigration visa that won't rile up the masses. Afterall, a chud does not reasonably believe that an influencer or a pornstar is stealing his job. So it goes.
O1 would probably want to see a huge number of followers. An OG model with a large following is someone with a huge amount of agency. Probably the highest agency sex worker of them all. Impossible to traffic
I wonder how much of the follower count is addressable. You can call to action for political followers but as a porn actor your values ends where your flesh stops being shown.
Because OF models are models... so I wonder if model management companies are upset about folks selling content directly to consumers without abusive middle management and drumming up outrage to protect their shitty business model.
Say what you want about sites like OF, but at least the performers get a huge chunk of the earnings.
If you are a professional in a sphere like engineering, then getting eg 10k views on your videos is very remarkable and acts as a indirect proof of acclaim. But when it is the whole metric, then it just overvalues public professions where in itself 10k views is nothing remarkable. That's the core issue as far as I understand.
(But even for professionals, it's a very gameable metric. There is a whole industry that helps getting published material and appearances for O-1 applications.)
Proof of interest, not acclaim. And online interest is heavily skewed to the narrow activities of entertainment and education - professional community communication happens but in far smaller numbers vs the other two.
By 1994, I was in triumphant optimism. I was young-ish, my country was in for its most beautiful decade ever, and the internet seemed to herald a time of final Liberation, with the Earth becoming home to a single, global scientist-philosopher society.
And so, suddenly, we find ourselves mired between traditionalist discomfort and pragmatic acceptance, an unglamorous terminus for earlier dreams of Human synthesis.
How is "extraordinary ability" defined? At what point does an influencer or OF model (or a traditional actor for that matter) have enough "extortionary ability" to get the visa?
Because they want to stay longer than tourist visas allow. And because most places (US definitely included) don't let you work remotely on a tourist visa either, with a few exceptions that wouldn't cover them sufficiently.
I hope the best for every people out there, including every usa citizen, but money alone won't attract every human profile under the sun, and unleashed imperialism which don't even pretend to export democracy anymore is doing nothing good for the the image of the country I'm afraid.
What a world really! Take care everything, might safety and peace remain on you and your relatives.
It is for this reason I am grateful to be a gen xr. I was at the end of my 20s when social media blew up, so it wasn’t a meaningful part of my personal development. I cannot bring myself to look at IG and the hot mess it serves up daily. A hyper focused lens on the potential of human desperation and stupidity.
I don’t hate on the younger generation, I feel bad they grew up with this shit and try to be a positive influence.
I see people of legit talent from doctors, to chemists and musicians dedicate themselves to posting content. What people don’t understand is survivor bias. For every success story you read about, how many people are going in reverse and not experiencing social mobility (and get depressed from it).
How do you know that the followers are not bots? It seems that on platforms with a clear bot problem like X, it would be relatively easy to hit that 1M target if you are willing to pay a bot farm.
That's for only one of the subtypes of visa. The official site (https://www.uscis.gov/working-in-the-united-states/temporary...) mentions a few more options, which would probably turn out to cover onlyfans if you get the right sort of professional advice:
> The O-1 nonimmigrant visa is for the individual who possesses extraordinary ability in the sciences, arts, education, business, or athletics, or who has a demonstrated record of extraordinary achievement in the motion picture or television industry and has been recognized nationally or internationally for those achievements
I mostly don’t care about influencers and OnlyFan, but that… Seems fine to me?
If you managed to amass 1M followers you clearly have strong abilities as an entertainer. The fact that the medium is different than what used to be the norm shouldn’t have an impact.
I struggle to understand who pays for OF content and who follows them ? From what I've read 99% of OF is porn in some form or another. So there are millions of people who create accounts and pay for it - linking their personnal info to this thing ?
As for the visa, it's not surprising and obviously idiotic for the society, but from the 'merit' standpoints it feels about right - if somebody has 10M followers, it's not that different from a radio or tv star.
just make it $ contingent OF models make ordinary income if someone is pulling in several million USD a year they are going to be paying a ton of taxes here. What is the downside?
Try now to convince a young person to become a doctor or an engineer, when an OF individual can make in a day what they will make in 40y, assuming they found a job anyway. Idiocracy was a glimpse into the future, not a movie.
Couldn't the same be said of all professions in which some people earn a lot, such as acting, sports, singing, entertainment in general, and which are considered less “serious” than the professions of medical doctor and engineer?
One might say that, in theory, the well-earning actor or actress has to show some craft at least, but there are plenty of actors whose popularity comes only from their looks--my dog would act better than them.
A lot of the youngsters who'd decide to make money undressing themselves on OF will soon realize they might have the will, but they lack the market power.
That's because you compare a median doctor/engineer with the best OF individuals. Wouldn't you want to compare them with Sergey Brin/Thomas Frist in this case.
Whatever the case may be, this has nothing to do with morals, but rather with classification of it as an "extraordinary" ability. Talking about that, instead of seething and name-calling, you could show us your extraordinary ability to go back to Reddit.
Also, I’m sorry you think cam girls and people who #ad carbonated water are considered skilled in the context of work and contributing to society meaningfully..
> “I don’t think [people] realize how much work actually goes into it,” she said. “You might not agree with the way the money is being made, or what people are watching, but people are still watching and paying for it.”
Presumably it's a Great Replacement dog whistle and the implication is that OnlyFans is a Jewish conspiracy to make white men impotent and to replace them with a different/preffered demographic. Total antisemitic garbage (and not in the sense that "any criticism of AIPAC is antisemitism," but actual and old school antisemitism).
It's conceivable that that isn't what they mean but I doubt it. Let's just flag that comment and move on, it's flamebait of the worst order.
"Whoever knowingly transports any individual in interstate or foreign commerce, or in any Territory or Possession of the United States, with intent that such individual engage in prostitution, or in any sexual activity for which any person can be charged with a criminal offense, shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than five years, or both"
The area seems greyer when, as happens in some operations, one person A is getting paid to have sex, and the other person B having the sex is paying person A, even if B is filming the sex and selling the video.
If they wanted to make that point, then they should have made that point instead of quoting a snippet of legislation of dubious relevance to an article that devoted more lines to chess influencers, fashion influencers, and musicians, than porn stars.
I think it's naïve to think that these girls are only very strictly selling feet images and are not in the business of having sex for money as well.
Especially when you consider the top-heavy success distribution. Sure there's influencers that have 100M views, but theres thousands of influencers with 300 views, are they going to be just happy with selling pictures for 10 bucks? Or will they follow the whales until they are paid to be flown into the prostitution assembly line, with or without visas.
Apparently porn is sex for money, but legally it's not prostitution. So in that case, these OF influencers can just bill their private services as coaching lessons for aspiring actors.
It's funny, early on it says
> The O-1 category includes the O-1A, which is designated for individuals with extraordinary ability in the sciences, education, business or athletics and the O-1B, reserved for those with “extraordinary ability or achievement”.
Then later it says
> The O-1B visa, once reserved for Hollywood titans and superstar musicians, has evolved over the years.
I understand those two aren't necessarily contradictory, but the wording of the first sentence paints a very different mental picture than the second one (at least it did for me), especially since they throw in the O-1A and then almost exclusively talk about people applying for the O-1B after that.
Personally, I don't want the US choosing to give visas to influencers over scientists, but if this visa was already being heavily used to bring in actors, musicians, and athletes I don't see what the hubbub is about. I don't use TikTok or OnlyFans and I don't find e-sports entertaining, but I have a hard time arguing that a screen actor, Victoria's Secret model, or soccer player should be worthy of a visa and a social media star, OnlyFans model, or a professional Counter Strike player shouldn't is not. It's all just entertainment.
I am not a lawyer. But OF models using O1 visa is totally fine. It is the intended purpose. The visa itself is meant for researchers, scholars who have job offers, athletes, actors etc. it has no cap and clear criteria. OF models who make a lot of money should totally qualify for this.
Also this visa in uncapped so giving visas to OF models does not take away anything from scientists and others.
O visa's original intent was to help pretty ladies from Eastern Europe to be brought into the country as indentured workers. That is why it is so easy to get this visa for an actor or a fashion model but very tough to get someone for their research.
So all this is working as intended.
I thought the reason for this to be a visa is because their fields' activities were in-person (acting in movies/plays/shows, academic life & research, sports training & leagues, etc). A streamer / OF worker is not like that as far as I know (but e-sports is). So this is purely to bring people with money and/or influence, nothing exceptional except the number of 0's.
What I know from news articles is that some of them openly "escort", like some traditional porn stars did more quietly. The fame on the screen can be brand-building for the even more lucrative in-person work.
As one said in a quote, regarding AI threat and crumbling economies: "The oldest profession will be the last profession."
If some of them want to move to the US right now, from currently healthier countries, one reason may be that social inequality means there are many deep-pocketed customers able to pay 5 figures for a weekend experience.
The decline of the US means that there will be increasingly fewer deep-pocketed customers able to pay 5 figures for anything.
Those who come to the US with enough money on the bank will have access to a lifestyle and experiences that are becoming more and more exclusive, which makes for great content for the peasant class to consume on their phones.
> The decline of the US means that there will be increasingly fewer deep-pocketed customers able to pay 5 figures for anything.
Those at the top are doing very well, it's those without access to capital who are struggling. America in decline looks like a bifurcated economy where low-paying jobs catering to the desires of the wealthy take up an increasingly large share of the economy. You can decide for yourself to what extent this is already happening.
A world war and a socialist-minded president could correct that for a good couple of decades but this time the US is going to be on the wrong side of history.
As an outsider, it's interesting to watch Nero play the fiddle while the rest of the world sanctions the US (except India and the Middle East and Taiwan). I think this is how the average Roman felt during Honorius' reign.
> A world war and a socialist-minded president could correct that for a good couple of decades
A world war meaning... the death of many / most Americans? That's quite the fantasy there.
US invading Greenland means all US troops in Europe risk getting captured/foxholed in their own military bases. That's 65k permanent staff and 20-35k on rotation. Or 10% of the US military, simply turning PoW (and a huge bargaining chip so early in the conflict).
It will also signal to the world that America is no longer world police, which means the Middle East, Japan and Taiwan will once again come under threat. The Middle East already foresaw this, which is why Saudi Arabia, Turkey and Pakistan are building a regional nuclear-enabled alliance, with open invitation to the other oil economies. Taiwan is most likely to get caught with their pants down, given the lack of US military support.
Interestingly, with the exist of the US from NATO, the largest military in NATO will be Turkey's, that country that Europe has long considered the unwanted bastard child.
That's fantasy. I seriously doubt Trump will invade Greenland, but even if so, there will be zero consequences for U.S. forces in Europe. Europe's armed forces are not capable of taking on U.S. troops in Europe.
Denmark already came off the meeting with Vance, openly stating that the US wants Greenland, and are prepared to invade it if needed.
https://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/europe/greenland-tr...
Europe only needs to encircle and starve them, not fight them.
> Europe only needs to encircle and starve them, not fight them.
With what navy and air force?
Conversely -- declining countries usually have a lot of deep-pocketed customers, and mind less of whether their crimes go public. They also tend to care less of spending money in wasteful ways, as those money were easily earned.
I wouldn't prophesize the 'decline' of the US, but if you're sufficiently wealthy, the kind of services and lifestyle options (like living in a luxury apartment overlooking the sea, or decent medical care), is available in a lot of places nowadays.
Well it's already declining. Remove the AI and tech industry and the US economy is in literal decline. Invading Greenland ensures NATO is crippled, Taiwan is left undefended and China finds a great excuse to impose sanctions on the US as part of a coordinated effort. That's a huge chunk of the semiconductor manufacturing lifecycle that becomes inaccessible to the US.
USA is doing pretty well and far from decline not withstanding local minimas they might hit.
When economic outlook is bad, it is generally the middle class and lower class that gets hit the hardest and women in these categories end up joining sin professions. Vegas always sees a big boom in 21 year olds in strip clubs when economy is bad.
Right now strip clubs are full of 35+ women why ? All the young ones are on OF. It is safer and much cleaner way of making money
Healthier countries? As in better physical health?
I believe they are implying that the US itself isn't in a healthy state. Economic disparity mostly, but also politically, socially, and likely physically. I think many would agree.
As in:
- Life expectancy at birth is lower than nearly all other high-income countries
- Preventable and treatable mortality rates are well above the OECD average
- Adult obesity rate is the highest among peer nations
- Infant mortality rate is worse than most developed countries
- Maternal mortality rate is dramatically higher than other wealthy nations
- Suicide rate exceeds the OECD average
- Drug overdose death rate is the highest in the developed world
- Prevalence of multiple chronic diseases is unusually high
- Physical inactivity rates exceed those of peer countries
- Healthcare spending per capita is the highest globally while outcomes lag peers
It increases the countries' soft power if people around the world watch content from there.
Eg. a self-reinforcing cycle that you get the best from the other immigrant categories arriving because they choose the country where everything "seems to be happening".
> I thought the reason for this to be a visa is because their fields' activities were in-person (acting in movies/plays/shows, academic life & research, sports training & leagues, etc). A streamer / OF worker is not like that as far as I know (but e-sports is).
Just like film work (which it is a kind of, in a sense), any place can be an OF set, but you need a set and, for performances with more than one performer, you generally need the performers at the same set. Physical proximity to both sets that you want to use and other performers who you might do recurring joint performances with seem to have obvious utility.
> A streamer / OF [may not have to be in person]
From what I understand about OF, it's not just people posting lewds, sometimes there are other actors in the media.
Having access to established actors and uh... "collaborating" with them would require being there in person I would guess.
As I understand it [1], usually if you try to cross the border declaring you intend to engage in sex work, they turn you away. Some combination of prudishness and concern about trafficking.
For there to be a special sex worker visa is a surprise, to me.
[1] https://www.pace-society.org/wp-content/uploads/2023/06/3194...
The distinction is that this is meant to bring in women in service to a man such that they’re sponsor is also their new boss in sex work, rather than women who service men while maintaining independent free will to control their career in sex work. The phrase “sex worker” could refer to either scenario and it’s important to distinguish the former from the latter in order to understand just how that particular criteria came to be. (And, yeah, it can be quite uncomfortable to discover that the U.S. has a special immigration pathway for wealthy and/or politically-connected men to import women as sex servants. Isn’t history swell, congress protects its privileges quite effectively, etc.)
It's strange, but is it really surprising? It's not like hypocrisy and moat building are new things in American politics.
These days I wouldn't even be surprised to discover it was intentional. Some person or group wanted to ensure they could engage in sex trafficking with a superficially legal cover, but didn't want it to actually be legal.
O visa is sponsored by an employer. The employer has to provide reasons why the person is being brought in USA. It makes perfect sense for USA to bring as many OF models as they want into USA as it could mean $$$$ in revenue for IRS, more money for US business and since these models are typically young there is lower load on any kind of welfare.
> A streamer / OF worker is not like that as far as I know (but e-sports is).
Well Streamer vs Influencer can be different potentially, that said I can think of one example even for video game streamers, that being the AGDQ charity event where speedrunners/streamers do stuff live for charity at the event space.
> I thought the reason for this to be a visa is because their fields' activities were in-person (acting in movies/plays/shows, academic life & research, sports training & leagues, etc). A streamer / OF worker is not like that as far as I know
An OnlyFans worker may make the bulk of her money by meeting fans in person for dates. That can't be done over the internet.
She's not really an "OnlyFans worker" in that case. OnlyFans is merely an advertising venue for an escort or prostitution service.
While possible to be for physical sex work, I think the previous commenter meant by meeting fans, would be like at a meet-and-greet at a Con, so they can further increase the parasocial relationship with the people giving them subscriptions, signing autographs. Also, they may be doing collabs with other content creators, just as comedians and actors will be on each others podcasts.
INA §212(a)(2)(D) renders inadmissible any alien who:
(i) is coming to the United States solely, principally, or incidentally to engage in prostitution, or has engaged in prostitution within 10 years of the date of application for a visa, admission, or adjustment of status,
(ii) directly or indirectly procures or attempts to procure, or (within 10 years of the date of application for a visa, admission, or adjustment of status) procured or attempted to procure or to import, prostitutes or persons for the purpose of prostitution, or receives or (within such 10-year period) received, in whole or in part, the proceeds of prostitution, or
(iii) is coming to the United States to engage in any other unlawful commercialized vice, whether or not related to prostitution
Obviously these people should be applying for EB-1s since that is the established visa program for prostitutes.
If they stream the sex on their OF feed, then it's not prostitution. Even if model is paid by the other person, it would be difficult to legally separate it from any other adult entertainment contract.
Wait until you hear about porn stars!
Think it’s likely for some OF is the sidegig and for others escorting is the sidegig.
Both would build brand, but I’d imagine making it big on OF streamer has a much higher cap than making it big as an escort.
TBH the president's (current) wife came in on an O1 visa too - as was the original intent like you said.
Why does someone doing OF need to be in the country? You can upload pictures from anywhere.
Because once you move to live in the US (or any other country) then you become tax liable there and every gov wants more net taxpayers.
Yeah this is the reason. People who earn a lot of money pay taxes and aren't a burden on any social services. More, please.
> aren't a burden on any social services
Until they retire and need end of life Medicare which is very expensive.
That's why some countries like Dubai have devised a work visa system that lets people work for decades but never lets them become citizens so Dubai can kick out the moment they stop working, before they need end of life care.
Only one percent of onlyfan models make money
I guess they branch out to more traditional porn industry, even if it's not obvious from their profiles?
It's not that they need to be in the country; they want to be in the country.
> O visa's original intent was to help pretty ladies from Eastern Europe to be brought into the country as indentured workers
That seems like something we should fix?
OF models make money until a certain age though. Sure, not too different to the current job market you could argue, but usually any "influencer" career today is quite short lived if you haven't a very specific niche.
In my country prostitution is legal, but I think some countries are very hypocritical here about OF.
Is the influencer career being short lived any different from an athlete
Not really. Athletes sometimes get advertising contracts, which OF models will probably not. But those athletes are probably a small minority as well.
It's the difference in difficulty for the criteria.
https://www.pathlawgroup.com/o1b-visa-requirements/
For traditional arts, you've gotta be good.For an influencer... some number of anonymous followers?
There are certainly some that would qualify... but it they should be held to the same standards as others.
There's a boy band, Boy Throb who specifically leveraged visa application in their recent content, and their immigration attorney advised the visa would be approved when they got 1,000,000 followers. They filmed themselves singing and dancing outside the US Immigration office to help one of their members applications.
Their visa application content is rather silly/absurd:
https://www.tiktok.com/@boy.throb/video/7572273147743980831
https://www.tiktok.com/@boy.throb/video/7567806911580622110
https://www.tiktok.com/@boy.throb/video/7584876341267270943
For a Youtube influencer I can see them meet 3 of the criteria by showing their influence on others, money earned, Youtube awards for viewership (by Google!). Maybe some platforms lend themselves more to being used for this sort of evidence than others.
- Evidence of a record of major commercial or critically acclaimed successes in the performing arts, as shown by box office receipts or record, cassette, compact disk, or video sales
- Evidence of significant recognition for achievements from organizations, government agencies, or other recognized experts in the field
- Evidence of having commanded a high salary or other significantly high remuneration for services in relation to others
- Youtube awards do not count towards the awards criteria. The award has to be for being highly selective not linked to mere subscribers.
I wonder people who have enough karma on the HN leaderboard would count...
Wait, HN has a leaderboard?
See "Lists" in the footer: https://news.ycombinator.com/lists
I never knew when I'd stop posting, but now I have a target
:-D ++1
But does it count then?
Huh.
#7 nice!
edit
https://news.ycombinator.com/leaders
Well if your audience is larger than an average CNN show, and you earn north of a million a year, don't you qualify?
A lot of youtube influencers are damn good at entertainment though, and a lot of “traditional media” entertainers are truely horrid. Ever seen a reality tv show? lol
...or anything with a laugh track? I tried some show a couple years back and was shocked to find that those still exist. I discovered it's a great signal of a show that I would not want to watch.
Yeah I mean, if people are into it that’s cool, good for them, but it’s weird to single out traditional media as somehow inherently better.
Seeing as how it's is trivial to buy followers, that metric should be completely abandoned, it's not legitimate.
It's maybe slightly less trivial to do, but still incredibly common to buy awards, recognition, press releases, positive reviews and commentary in publications.
You might be shocked to find out how much the performers being written about in magazines or discussed on TV shows is a direct line to the production company promoting them. Similar for awards.
Shouldn't be shocked, really. This is exactly what people pay PR companies for.
> You might be shocked to find out how much the performers being written about in magazines or discussed on TV shows is a direct line to the production company promoting them. Similar for awards.
I mean Payola as a term literally came from bribing DJs on radio stations to play your / your artist's music.
Money is an option, regardless. EB-5 is about $1M invested into your own business, 10 people hired.
> For traditional arts, you've gotta be good.
> > advertisements, press releases, publications contracts, or endorsements
> > box office receipts or record, cassette, compact disk, or video sales
> > Evidence of having commanded a high salary or other significantly high remuneration for services in relation to others
I fail to see the distinction you are trying to draw. Commercial value and celebrity has always been one of the metrics of "achievement".
The overall gist is that the visa application should be someone who is not easily replaced by an existing local worker that can generate similar value.
The specifics of the law are:
8 CFR 214.2(o)(3) ( https://www.ecfr.gov/current/title-8/part-214/section-214.2#... )
The key is that this is extraordinary. About 20,000 O1B visas across all fields ( https://www.passright.com/how-many-o-1-visas-are-issued-each... )This isn't a local worker thing (the H visas) but rather bringing the best and brightest from across the world to the United States.
https://www.hio.harvard.edu/o-1-visa-individuals-extraordina...
> The O-1 visa is a temporary work visa designated for individuals who have achieved and sustained national or international acclaim for extraordinary ability in the sciences, arts, education, business or athletics, or individuals who have demonstrated a record of extraordinary achievement in the motion picture and television industries.
> O-1 Extraordinary Ability visa status is reserved for those who are among the small percentage of experts who have risen to the top of their field. The approval of an O-1 petition by the United States Citizenship & Immigration Services (USCIS) decides whether an individual qualifies for O-1 classification. This classification requires a substantial amount of evidence. The O-1 is a very complicated visa category subject to high levels of scrutiny by the U.S. government. Due to the complexity, the O-1 visa is used very infrequently.
At what point do we ever ask ourselves -- "what kind of culture do we want to create for the future of our country?" I don't think a pro soccer player is comparable to an onlyfans contributor. I would much prefer my future kids to be inspired by Cristiano Ronaldo than someone baring themselves on camera.
Yet CR7 is routinely photographed baring himself on camera, which is one of the reasons he's so popular.
Alongside delivering in performance, and being a role model in pushing oneself to the limit in regards to training.
Photos don't win matches.
I'd be willing to bet that a vast majority of his "followers" are not because of his antics on the field but because of his thirst trap images
I am not an expert, but I would guess there is a lot of "pushing oneself to the limit" on OF...
What's wrong with an OnlyFans contributor? It's a self-employed job that services a demand within the economy and pays taxes. It's pretty close to the ideal job an immigrant can have since the product is already globalized but the revenue is not - i.e. an OnlyFans influencer with an American audience who moves to America is now bringing that income back into the economy via taxes and spending, or if they have an international audience they are attracting foreign dollars into your economy and strengthening your currency position.
Extracting money from horny young men with an illusion of intimacy/friendship just doesn't seem ethical. Or good for society as a whole.
Especially when you've got streamers using sites like Twitch, aimed at younger gamers, promoting their OnlyFans porn.
The regular porn industry is bad enough (https://traffickinghub.com/), but at least the content is non-interactive, there's no pretence of friendship/connection.
Most users understand that there is no real friendship.
Just like people understand that the violence in movies is fake.
What makes an onlyfans contributor worse than an actor in a violent movie?
Good question read up on it
https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/pornography-censorship/
Sex work (OF or otherwise) is unsavory, that's what. You can't stop it but there's zero reason we should be going out of our way to grant visas to sex workers.
> there's zero reason
The comment you are replying to articulated, I think rather clearly, one reason why maybe we should.
I think what you actually mean is that the reasons not to ("sex work is unsavory") outweigh the reasons to ("sex work is going to happen anyway and if some of the people doing it move to the US then they will spend their money and pay their taxes in the US and contribute to the economy there").
Maybe you're right, maybe you're not, but I don't think you should say "there's zero reason" when in fact there obviously are reasons and you just think other countervailing reasons matter more.
If what you’re just concerned about people “baring themselves on camera” then they can continue to do that without emigrating to America and it would still affect your culture. The internet is global after all.
Also, it’s going to take more than a few thousand immigrants a year to affect the culture of a country as populous as America.
The internet is global, but having folks in our midst who make a living that way has more of an effect on our culture than if they are just on the internet.
Why?
I actually worked in the adult industry earlier in my career so have a better insight than most. and I can tell you that these models are just normal people like you an I. They aren’t interested in corrupting your children nor throwing wild sex parties in public spaces.
Just because they don't have ill intent doesn't mean the fact that some of the most highly paid members of our society being sex workers sends a message about what kind of skills and assets are valuable, and which aren't as valuable.
Unfortunately that ship has already sailed and immigration wasn’t the reason.
It turns out that American citizens can work in the adult industry too and it’s not just immigrants who are capable of earning money from getting naked on camera. ;)
Isn't that argument just a form of the sunk cost fallacy?
Only if you demonise the adult entertainment industry, which I wasn’t.
That's a non sequiter. You said the "ship has sailed", so we shouldn't attempt to reset norms.
> skills and assets
I saw what you did there :D
> They aren’t interested in corrupting your children nor throwing wild sex parties in public spaces.
RFK Jr., the current top health official in the US, is not interested in harming children either, and thinks he is doing a good public service: what is the reality though?
* https://arstechnica.com/health/2026/01/measles-continues-rag...
* https://arstechnica.com/health/2026/01/under-anti-vaccine-rf...
* https://arstechnica.com/health/2026/01/warning-about-bogus-a...
One's intentions and the results of one's actions can be two different things.
* https://acpeds.org/the-impact-of-pornography-on-children/
* https://www.sciencefocus.com/the-human-body/is-pornography-h...
* https://extension.usu.edu/relationships/research/effects-of-...
* https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Effects_of_pornography
Last time I checked, “cam girls” don’t run the country. So I don’t think you can make a comparison there.
Plus the issues with JFK Jr are specific to him. It’s a bit of a stretch to imply that his view points are in any way related to his exposure pornography. That is unless “brain work” is some kind of euphemism I’m unaware of ;)
> One's intentions and the results of one's actions can be two different things.
Those articles mention just as many positives as negatives.
Porn isn’t inherently bad. It’s like alcohol, exercise, and other past times: moderation is the key.
Humans can get addicted to any kind of behaviour. The absolute worst thing you can do is make a topic a taboo because then you cannot keep people safe. This is as true for pornography as it is for weightlifting.
And frankly, hadn’t you got better things to do than worry about what consenting adults do in their private lives? It’s all a bit silly and prudish don’t you think?
[dead]
i mean you said it yourself, the internet is global. those few thousand can have impressions of hundreds of millions. whether they do their cam shows abroad or local matters little. it's the inherent incentivization approved by a government that leads to deeper cultural erosion. if you're in a poor country with no access to education, and your only way into the US is porn, then that's what will ultimately win, rather than incentivizing higher education, etc. And before an argument is made that this will just be a way to get in and then those folks will go and seek PHDs and be productive members of society--i have a bridge to sell you.
If a person immigrates to the USA due to success with onlyfans, are they not productive members of society by virtue of having taxable & disposable income from the fruits of their labor? They don't need a PHD to be productive anymore than a soccer player, mentioned earlier. In reality we already have American citizens in the US paying for their college degrees via onlyfans.
[dead]
Sex sells and everybody knows that. Why should the government use antiquated-at-best moral codes to discriminate against people who will increase the global influence of the country? Cultural exportation and exploitation have been key to US soft power for nearly a century.
crack also sells, amongst many other things that are inherently horrible for broad modern society.
> Why should the government use antiquated-at-best moral codes to discriminate against people who will increase the global influence of the country
this is a very loaded statement that assumes that everyone is in agreement that proliferating and rewarding cam models is some kind of inherent good. there's nothing antiquated morally with simply not rewarding it. i'm not stating to ban it outright. there's always use in it at the long tail of society
> i'm not stating to ban it outright. there's always use in it at the long tail of society
You might not have any interest in adult entertainment, but that doesn’t mean the industry only exists in the “long tail of society”.
The problem with social taboos is rarely a moral one, and usually more that people feel embarrassed or scared to be open and honest.
And usually that stems from others being unreasonably judgmental.
> The problem with social taboos is rarely a moral one, and usually more that people feel embarrassed or scared to be open and honest.
And usually that stems from others being unreasonably judgmental.
You're using broad sweeping statements to argue with a point that I'm not even making.
First off, you're only assuming I'm making this argument because I don't have an interest in adult entertainment. I just don't believe it needs to be shoved into every facet of society. The industry certainly _does_ exist in the long tail, because there's literally nothing interesting in it aside from the fact that people use it to get off and move on with their lives. It's like taking a dump. Everyone does it, but I don't need to sit around a dinner table discussing it as if it's some high brow art. And I certainly don't want people to be treated extra specially because they excel at taking dumps.
Nobody was suggesting that models should or would talk about adult content at the dinner table. What a weird comparison to make.
My point was literally that it’s a bigger industry than you give credit to because it’s a topic that isn’t generally discussed in polite conversation.
But I don’t think this is a topic we are likely to agree on. So perhaps it’s better to agree to disagree.
It worked for melania!
I see no difference in Cristiano Ronaldo and a porn star and an influencer and whatever you name it. They are all idols that sell stories for people to project their own thoughts and desires onto and get emotional. I would be more worry about my kid believing in celebrities, regardless of who they are. And the American mainstream culture is filthy anyway. As the old French joke once said the difference of yogurt and the us is that if you leave yogurt for a coupled of hundred years they would develop culture.
You would not have a lot of trouble with your kid trying to be best in basketball, or football, and make a name for it.
I don't think the same would apply to OF or porn. Totally different things.
You do aware of being best in sport and what I just said are hella two different things right? I wish my kids aware that *hell is other people*. Otherwise being a porn star or being a sport star makes not so much difference. Both can give you mental struggles and physical injuries. I think the another comment articulate it well too.
Edit: And sure It's concerning that the society being shallow but OF and porn are just consequences not the cause. Without them we would have something else to turn important human experience(ie sex) into a commercial show and twisted it. Turn humans into tradable goods. Body commodification is just moral decay and the end of civilization! I think we already have such a thing called ... sports? Edit: professional sports
Sports is not turning body into tradable good.
Sports is hard work, discipline, drive, often starting as a kid.
players are frequently "bought" and "sold" based off of their physical attributes? It's literally turning your body into a tradable good.
Professional sports is. Difference between professional sports and sports is like prostitution/OF/porn and sex.
Uh hum.
I mean, this is purely for socially constructed morality reasons.
In actuality, both require you to sell your body, and both can have long standing health effects. If anything, I would say the typical OF model sells their body much less than an athlete. I mean, I don't think they're going to tear their ACL.
And also, both offer no real tangible value to humanity. Sports do not produce anything, neither does porn, they're purely for entertainment. A cashier at McDonalds is providing more absolute value to the world than even the most esteemed athlete.
That's not to say that athletes are bad, entertainment and games are important. But you can't just say one form of mindless entertainment is more valuable than another form.
Anything is a social construct.
I don't know if you'd want to marry a porn star, and if not, that should tell you what he difference is. This is one of those things which is "freedom" in theory but has many second order effects in practice.
As much as I don't want to marry a porn star I don't want to marry a professional sports player. And you know what? Just because these people are allowed into a country doesn't mean the local residents want to marry them.(The reverse ironically works tho)
The point is either reject all of them or treat them all equally.
I'd have no issue marrying a porn star, but maybe I'm strange. But, regardless, we don't qualify immigrants but how marry-able they are.
Immigration policies are shaped around something that government wants more of. Skill, labor, etc.
I don't see a world where of star qualifies for that.
It's certainly a very profitable industry, I don't see why they wouldn't want it. Outside of "eww icky" type reasoning, which as I've said, I don't think is important or worth humoring.
Everyone thinks rome will fall because of promiscuity. I just don't buy that weak morals, whatever that may mean, has a negative effect on society. Ultimately, these people do not hurt anyone and they push a lot of money into the economy.
It's just mindless entertainment. And, on the topic of skills: skills mean nothing. Being skilled is not enough, you have to be skilled at the right things.
Think of it this way: the skill of putting a ball through a hoop is one that is, objectively, worthless. There's no situation in modern life, or frankly even prehistoric life, where that skill would help you or create value.
It has value because we say so. We say "people want to watch this". If you take away the people watching, then the skill is beyond worthless. Worth less than even talking. Now, parallel this to porn, and you will see it's the same situation.
> A cashier at McDonalds is providing more absolute value to the world than even the most esteemed athlete.
Do you actually believe this or are you just ragebaiting?
> That's not to say that athletes are bad, entertainment and games are important. But you can't just say one form of mindless entertainment is more valuable than another form.
Sport isn't mindless entertainment--that's just objectively false. The "dumb" entertainment you're speaking of is built _around_ sports (e.g gambling) while physical competition is as old as time. Porn is also the exact opposite of this. It's just a byproduct of entertainment and boredom/vice. For sports, humans have pushed themselves to the extreme limit through discipline for a millennia--which inspires many, creates stronger people, gets some out of poverty, or depression, or countless other things. The fact that you're comparing porn to sports or the most esteemed athletes to random low level cashiers at McDonalds in value creation for society tells me you're an advanced troll and I already just spent too much time replying.
I'm not a troll, we just disagree. Sports and games are mindless entertainment.
Yes, competition is important - but it doesn't produce anything. If I win a game, I haven't won anything other than the ability to say I've won the game. I didn't produce a good, I didn't cook food or blow glass.
Now, entertainment does create value around it. Taking attention can be used for advertising and admission. But the exact same thing is true of porn, and to the same if not greater extent.
I also don't buy the whole "discipline" angle. Yes, sports are hard and take practice. But you're making a morality argument. Just because something takes blood, sweat and tears doesn't mean it's good. Eating a couch takes discipline, too, just ask that one guy on My Strange Addiction.
The only reason, and I do mean only reason, we view porn as less valuable is because we think it's icky. That's it. But I don't particularly think that's a strong argument for anything.
just entertainment? Aton of people just watch sports to shout at the TV (or field) and drink beer. A lot more than are genuinely interested in the physical performance.
And really, we absolutely glorify entertainment in our society. People look up more to Kim Kardashian or a Will Smith than a king. Athletes also but more because they bring in the "win" which is more entertainment. It's all about making you feel good about winning or the chance of it, and the Idea that you're part of it.
In the interest of fairness, can you really say different about "mainstream" French culture?
Well I don't know much about French aside from the joke but Cannes obviously has way better taste than Hollywood.
The neat part is, with social media and global internet, culture are generally degenerating regardless of countries. If I were American citizen(gladly Im not) I might as well just let them in to get some tax money, and potentially see if the industry can be used as a soft propaganda machine. Just like Hollywood.
There are hundreds of small film festivals all over the United States each year. The biggest that I know is probably Sundance Film Festival. They have just as much "taste" (whatever that means) as Cannes (Film Festival). France also produces lots of shitty French language films that never leave the French-speaking world. Canal+ is the gold standard for French language film production.
film nerds gonna films nerds. What I mean was Plame vs Oscar since bro was asking mainstream sorry for the confusion. And just bcz French do shit movies too doesn't invalidate the statement sadly. Don't get me wrong. Nor do I think French is that superior.
The other replies to this show a form of argumentation that's always fascinated me.
You say "We should encourage X over Y" and the retorts are
None directly disagree with the original point, but they do imply fault in the original reasoning without providing any proof or requiring any effort.The third one is a classic, the straw man. A concise implication of error in which a good-faith response would be long-winded and boring comparatively.
To what end?
What are they hoping to get out of disagreeing with someone trying to encouraging our future culture to be one of relative wholesomeness?
... Why take the time out of one's day to say "well... encouraging X is great and all but you know what's better? passive-aggressively working against anyone that suggests it."?
It is disappointing that it is so easy to bamboozle HNers with a straw man argument.
The original poster was clearly not making an analogy between professional soccer and only fans creators.
To be explicit, the comparisons were:
Cinematic actors -> TikTok creators
Victoria’s Secret model -> only fans creator
Pro soccer -> esports
I fail to see how the culture of our country will be negatively impacted by any of those changes. Comparing Cristiano Renaldo to OnlyFans is a straw man because that specific comparison was never suggested, except by the “rebuttal”
I don't believe the rigidity of the comparisons matter within the broad context of my point. Regardless of whether OP didn't directly compare pro soccer to OF, the point is that allowing the degradation of expectations of Visas will only incentivize low effort crap. And yes, one can sit here and argue all day that OF fans, or TikTok creators are the same thing as Victorias secret models or Cinematic actors (and I would argue that's far from true) but I think most of us can all feel societal erosion happening and the decline of average IQs and the fact that a huge generation of growing young adults can barely read. Let's not pretend this has nothing to do with multiple epidemics like porn addiction, gambling, and general disregard of trying to better yourself because 90% of people are using 80% of their days staring at said TikTok creators
> but I think most of us can all feel societal erosion happening and the decline of average IQs and the fact that a huge generation of growing young adults can barely read. Let's not pretend this has nothing to do with multiple epidemics like porn addiction, gambling, and general disregard of trying to better yourself because 90% of people are using 80% of their days staring at said TikTok creators
None of this is true, but boy, it sure does feel good to believe.
I wish you, and people in general, would be more willing to look for something like truth instead of whatever feels good at the moment.
pointless comment that doesn't say anything. but, i do wish i could live in the imaginary world you live in
I think before we suggest whether policy is good or bad, we need to agree on the meaning of vague terms like "societal erosion." What about society is eroding? You mention IQ and literacy. What about tolerance, open-mindedness, compassion, equality, financial success... Some of these things are going up and some are going down. Are there other dimension to "societal erosion?"
i do think it's important to define what a healthy society looks like, but I'm going to guess everyone will have a very different answer. It's a topic that likely doesn't have any kind of straightforward response with unanimous agreement.
I would argue that beyond basics like food, shelter and protection of human rights, we should strive for more noble pursuits as society. I'm not even religious whatsoever, but I think the proliferation of certain vices like sex/gambling/drugs is probably a net negative for society. They certainly have their roles in the long tail, but overall a society that is caught up in rampant dopamine chasing is a distracted, doomed society. We should always be yearning. We should be paving a road that is a better one for our future generations. Societal erosion is creating short term profit/happiness at the expense of long term thinking. America has become the king of this. You can see it everywhere, from the types of businesses people create (e.g pyramid schemes in the form of courses, or the shovel makers that create businesses to proliferate said pyramid schemes) to what is currently valued by the growing generation. I can keep going and going, but I'll leave it here. I hope I somewhat made my point. I'm sure many will disagree, and that is why this country is on its way downwards. The few smart will own and create a lot of value for themselves, we'll likely have a few trillionaires, and the majority will be bumbling idiots that can barely read. We're not there yet, but we're well on the way there
it's low iq pedantry/contrarianism that pervades the tech industry that i refuse to engage with. it's exactly the same people that will bikeshed every feature into the abyss. i agree and appreciate your sentiment.
The more I hear about culture, the more I think it seems like the new age mysticism of the right
You should look into Ivanka Trump. It's quite funny.
Never, none of this shit matters
what is the difference?
They don't believe in the concept of a culture improving or declining. It's an axiom of a certain ideology that no culture can be inferior to another.
It's not "just entertainment". We want extraordinary athletes and musicians to inspire people and show them what humans are capable of. Extraordinary prostitutes are generally not inspiring people in the way that most people probably would like society to move. It's fine to place different amounts of cultural value on these things and not remain neutral about the worth of all possible human endeavors.
When someone describes themselves as an "influencer", it is entirely appropriate to ask what sort of influence they're having, and whether we want that.
Lots of extraordinary athletes are not good role models, yet we still grant them O1 visas. Many of them have many children to different women and are terrible fathers. To me, influencers are like the athletes of the attention economy. In the old world (20+ years ago, before iPhones), media was much more tightly controlled. It was harder to get famous. Now with mobile Internet, a new, parallel fame hierarchy that appeared. To me, most influencers seem like popular people from high school, but they use social media to extend their reach and shelf-life.
+1. While supreme court defines the likes of porn as freedom of expression, it's a different thing for a country to want different kinds of professions to be more common through its immigration system.
Entertainment is an industry :)
It would be unwise to filter out the fun people. We'd all become a bunch of unfun nerds.
Sir, this is HN. Being an unfun nerd is practically a prerequisite.
Speak for yourself :)
Don’t worry. Self-awareness is not required. ;)
While I know you wrote this in jest, you raise a very good point! A lot of people with STEM jobs unwind after a long day by watching or listening to comedy -- TV, film, stand-up, YouTube, whatever. I have no issue with it. Also, lots of them go home and play video games. That is another form of entertainment (fun).
The latter part is in jest anyway. The former is true! It would be quite boring to live in a world without a proper entertainment industry -- agreed.
Kinda funny this comment is downvoted!
I guess the question is why do virtual/internet stars need to be in the US? Actors or musicians would have primarily performed live or been recorded live, in US cities. But an OF model? Why does this person need to be physically located in the US at all? What is the benefit to the person, or to the US?
> What is the benefit to the person, or to the US?
Not that I encourage it but... Obviously an OF model moving to the US means US users viewing that person now stop sending money abroad. And people from all over the world watching that model now send money to the US.
It's not just tax revenues: it's shifting the balance of money in the US's favor. If an OF model makes $10m a year and pays $2m in taxes, it's not just $2m in tax revenues for the US: it's also in addition to that $8m that are now spent/staying in the US.
Benefit to the person is probably a path to citizenship and more economic opportunities (especially since being a camgirl is a young person’s career with almost no long-term prospects)
Benefit to the USA, being generous, is that those earnings of the camgirl may then be spent in the US instead of flowing overseas. At least some of it will.
Critics would rightly point out though that importing thousands of camgirls increases demand for apartments (and even more than the typical person because I bet they’re less likely to live with roommates than a typical woman of the same age) and we have a massive housing crisis in all cities. Maybe if the camgirls want to move to the rust belt or something, it could still work out net positive.
> Benefit to the person is probably a path to citizenship
As I understand it, from an O-1 visa (a temporary one that needs to be renewed every year after the third), the next step is the Employment-Based Immigration: First Preference EB-1 visa.
https://www.uscis.gov/working-in-the-united-states/permanent...
> You may be eligible for an employment-based, first-preference visa if you are an alien of extraordinary ability, are an outstanding professor or researcher, or are a certain multinational executive or manager. Each occupational category has certain requirements that must be met ...
An OF model isn't likely to fall under the "outstanding professors and researchers" or the "certain multinational executive"... so we're going with the extraordinary ability criteria.
> You must meet at least 3 of the 10 criteria* below, or provide evidence of a one-time achievement (i.e., Pulitzer, Oscar, Olympic Medal) as well as evidence showing that you will be continuing to work in the area of your expertise. No offer of employment or labor certification is required.
More on the specifics can be found at https://www.uscis.gov/policy-manual/volume-6-part-f-chapter-...
After reading this... I'm going to say that it is unlikely that an OF model would meet the requirements for an EB-1 visa as a path to citizenship.
Thanks for the research. I didn't know that at all. I guess the main path to citizenship then is getting a green card and citizenship by marriage. That's a very real possibility which wouldn't be nearly as easy to do if you were working from Russia or Colombia.
I assume that foreign influencers (Instagram, YouTube, OF) mostly move to two places: (1) Los Angeles or (2) Miami. Both have great weather and large networks of people in similar industry.
I would like to point out the long term prospects part may not be true for high earners. Some models make a senior software engineers annual salary in a matter of months. Many of these people can retire and live off investments at age 35.
Perfectly fair point! Although when I've seen OF stats published the median model makes like $1,000 a year or something. So I think if you took even the top 5,000 models out of the computation, most of them are not earning enough to pay for a nice lifestyle in the moment, let alone funding retirement by the time their beauty declines.
What I think is more likely to happen though with an immigrant OF model (who isn't in that elite earning tier) is that she meets a partner in the US, which affords her an exit strategy if she doesn't want to (or can't) keep doing OF forever.
The benefit to the person is going to vary. For one reason or another they prefer to be in US rather than wherever they currently are. I'm sure each person has their own unique set of reasons, but it's not hard to imagine.
A benefit for the US is increased GDP, tax revenue, etc.
Tax revenue
What is the average turnover/tenure of a camgirl? I'd think that most popular camgirls come and go pretty quickly, such that giving them visas that were formerly reserved for performing musicians would not necessarily make sense.
Because they want to
What the fuck?
I can think of maybe two musicians who might be said to fit in that tight intersection.
Brian May (guitarist from Queen) who has an astrophysics PhD from Imperial College London
Professor Brian Cox who teaches Physics at Manchester University and is a public face of science of tv here in the UK was keyboardist for one-hit-wonder band d-reem who had a hit in the 90s with “Things can only get better”.
Brian May is really the only one who is a superstar musician but Brian Cox is a more significant scientist.
I think back when it was just actors, musicians, athletes, etc. it was in a time when there were gatekeepers for whether or not those people had any actual talent in an art.
Whether or not those gatekeepers were right is another matter, but there was some guy in an office in a skyscraper who you had to impress, and if you did, you could get in.
Now, that guy's effectively gone. Aiden Ross, Jack Doherty - that kind of guy - couldn't have impressed a big wig. But now, they don't have to. They have to make people pay attention to them on YouTube/Instagram/TikTok/Twitch, and that's it. And they do that and they can get people to give them insane money to do so because they want access to that audience. Quality doesn't matter anymore.
I’ve been thinking lately a lot of female pornographic actresses on sites such as Brazzers don’t have US origins.
Does anyone know on which work visa do models come in then? It can’t be H1B…
> Does anyone know on which work visa do models come in then? It can’t be H1B…
The H-1B1 visa is the one that we're mostly familiar with. Specialist occupations that require "[t]heoretical and practical application of a body of highly specialized knowledge and [a]ttainment of a bachelor's or higher degree in a directly related specific specialty (or its equivalent) as a minimum for entry into the occupation in the United States."
The H-1B2 visa is for DOD Researcher and Development Project Worker.
The H-1B3 visa is for... Fashion Model
> The position/services must require a fashion model of prominence.
> To be eligible for this visa category you must be a fashion model of distinguished merit and ability.
https://www.uscis.gov/working-in-the-united-states/h-1b-spec... (expand the eligibility criteria)
The specifics of the law are at https://www.ecfr.gov/current/title-8/part-214/section-214.2#... - subsection 1 matches H-1B1, 2 matches H-1B2, and 3 matches H-1B3
> 8 CFR 214.2(h)(4)(i)(A)(3) - Will perform services in the field of fashion modeling and who is of distinguished merit and ability.
O1. It was specifically designed for this sort of professions and sports. For example when Chess Grandmasters from India come to USA.
But many are. Stormy Daniels, for example, is American.
For what it's worth, as a O-1 scientist you have to provide evidence that you:
...are a member of scholarly/professional organizations;
...have published original research works scientifically and internationally (peer reviewed publications);
...that you have judged the work of others (supervised and/or examined Ph.D. candidates);
...that you have consulted to governments;
...that you have repeatedly been invited as guest speaker at conferences, trade fairs or universities;
...that you won major international scholarships and awards (e.g. best paper awards at conferences, Masters's/doctoral scholarships from prestigious universities like Oxford, Cambridge, Harvard or MIT;
...that three referees that are themselves O-1 level equivalents deem you worthy of receiving O-1 status;
...that you are a named inventor on patent applications and granted patents;
...that you have received media coverage;
...that you abilities are reflected in higher than typical compensation/salary/remuneration;
...that you won major international scholarships and awards (e.g. best paper awards at conferences, Masters's/doctoral scholarships from prestigious universities like Oxford, Cambridge, Harvard or MIT; or
...that you have published significant works (i.e., works that created impact through citations, business creation, or software systems using the methods described therein).
Usually, from an official ist similar to the above (which I re-wrote from memory here), three out of nine or so checkboxes is the lowest bar for an O-1, and if you tick all of them and work with a specialist law firm, then it should be a slam dunk; my O-1 took about six months from application to grant back in 2008 (no payments of any "expediting fees" if they exist were made as far as I know).
arguably the O-1B is more necessary than the O-1A. If you didn't have an O-1B you couldn't have a bjork come and give a concert in the US and get paid for it, you couldn't have an emma thompson come and shoot for a hollywood film and get paid for it, you couldn't hold ANY major international sporting events, etc.
Which one did Melania qualify for? Type O 1A or O 1B?
E-1, according to Snopes, citing the Washington Post:
https://www.snopes.com/news/2025/07/02/melania-trump-einstei...
The painting of idiocracy hits hard doesn't it ?
Being able to shove 5 inch diameter dildo 12 inches up your rectum is extraordinary ability no matter how you slice and dice it. Useless - sure.
If you slice and dice it, it’s not 5 inch or 12 inch.
Sorry couldn’t help
I personally find this opinion typical of HN readers, and I argue that successful influencers/pretty-people can easily beat more serious professions in terms of economic value, because the vast majority of people are more human than the average HN reader.
Journalist see OnlyFans. Write about it. Click send. Make money.
[flagged]
6 minute old account strikes again!
HN is getting overrun, man.
It'd be fun to see a filter similar to [dead] where you could just blissfully ignore these baity throwaway accounts.
edit: ironically to the person using a throwaway to yell racial slurs under me I do browse with [dead] visible because I find some of them amusing, more amusing than most of the throwaways even, though the funniest ones have seemingly stopped posting.
[dead]
Can you provide a source for this information?
You probably don't want to see where they pulled that fact out of...
But if you want to, it's on OF
Imagine creating an account to make this comment!
Tale as old as time.
Dial M for Melania.
basically, US Gov want to tax these ultra rich OnlyFans "model"
that's why they accept so much, the circulation of money would bring an enormous currency more than "traditional" job ever could
I think it's fair to say with the newly evolving markets, governments are fighting to house them and tax them
Such articles are interesting because they're tacit disapproval, but I would argue that this use of the O-1 is the most American way to use it.
There's a reason why Hollywood became the Earth's center of cultural gravity post-WW2, https://goldenglobes.com/articles/exiles-and-emigres-hollywo...
You may argue that these people aren't of such import, but I would beg to differ. This is the future of culture. These people shape the culture that the young people around you consume. They create the memes of six-seven-ification.
Influencers as the future of culture is not great. Hollywood had a ton of issues but it at least had some... class? If you watch an interview with Mr. Beast or other famous influencers they are concerningly ignorant, have little self-awareness and a child-like approach to reality. It makes total sense given these are teenagers who were lauded with fame for entertaining other teenagers on social media.
I watched the Mr. Beast episode of David Letterman's show, and I had no expectations but figured he must have some charisma as the most watched youtube person. He was unable to explain basic concepts, had no self-awareness, and generally seemed detached from any sort of reality. It was shocking to think that is who is shaping young peoples minds.
“but it at least had some... class” Not if you’d have asked the WASPs at the time, they very much looedk down on Hollywood. Saw it as vulgar and beneath them for many of the same reasons people dislike MrBeast. The 'class' only came afterwards.
The movie industry was, for much of the 20th century, split between production in Hollywood and finance in New York. Probably the last gasp of that was Marvel, where, for a long time, the merch and comic people in New York made the final decisions.
Which is weird cause it's all but certain MrBeast will be president in the near future. But maybe they just don't view the president as classy?
Hollywood actors being vapid idiots is a trope, or rather reality, as old as Hollywood. Every time they go on Letterman they have to carefully follow the script written for them to avoid embarrassing themselves and the industry. And they often fail at that.
BTW, actors are very often prostitutes. Have been since ancient times and the association has stuck. Mediterranean yachts are packed full of C-lister actresses/hookers. Not to mention most of them get jobs by sleeping with producers, which is just an indirect form of prostitution. I don't know about you, but classy is the last way I'd describe Jennifer Lawrence sucking Weinstein's dick.
> Hollywood had a ton of issues but it at least had some... class?
It looked that way because they had media training and their public personas were carefully managed, with staged interviews and media appearances. Behind the scenes, it’s a different story.
Influencers are rewarded for seeming authentic. Mr Beast coming across badly in a traditional TV interview just makes his audience think he’s more real.
Yes you're describing class.
I would disagree. If you have no class in private, you have no class.
I think things like "classiness," "grace," and "tact" are all but dead, both in Hollywood and across the population. Everyone seems to be mentally teenagers, but in middle-age bodies.
I understand this sentiment. When I look at my own life, one culture constant has been the decline of "formalism" -- dress, language, jobs, inter-generational relationships, privacy. If anything, the average YouTuber is a pretty average person -- not too good looking, not too well coached by a PR team, not too well dressed. Isn't this a cultural "win" because we are getting more authentic content, instead of ~10 major TV networks and film studios deciding who we should watch?
Yep. But give it a few decades for the money to figure out how to wall off outsiders, insulate their little cadres of influencers and firm up networks of fake and real methods to direct popularity.
Still - probably better than Hollywood in the long run, and more accessible, even in the hellish direction it will undoubtedly go.
When I was a kid, I used to world WWF (World Wrestling Federation) with my best friend. We loved the interviews (pre/post "fight"). Those guys were idiots and certainly "detached from any sort of reality", but also very funny to 10 year old boys! I also liked Jean-Claude Van Damme movies. I turned out just fine.
> Hollywood had a ton of issues but it at least had some... class?
Hollywood took a bribe from the tobacco industry to make smoking "cool" and infect our nation with cigarettes.
> have little self-awareness
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_mpUxn7NybY : "A big opportunity for us is that there are no gatekeepers. There's no one I have to convince to let me do things."
:-)
For actors it was "took a bribe" for influencers it is modus operandi.
> Hollywood took a bribe from the tobacco industry to make smoking "cool" and infect our nation with cigarettes.
I think the whole world took up smoking because of Hollywood.
To use anecdotes of specific influencers or even to cultural short/med-term memes misses the OP’s fundamental point in saying
> “this is the future of culture”.
The point is that the future of “culture” is increasingly decentralized; that the ability or more aptly, the opportunity, to accumulate “cultural influence” will tend towards higher entropy as a direct repercussion to the proliferation of the means to accumulate it.
Put differently, as the hardware and software used to record, store, and share content become more widely accessible, anyone with the access and motivation to use the tools truly has the opportunity to become famous.
'Class','taste' etc these are all very subjective. One could argue that Mr Beast built all of his fame from scratch and didnt have it handed to him or having to sleep with some powerful gatekeeper - something you can't say about all your 'classy' hollywood stars. If you go back a century you can probably find people kvetching about the lack of class of these new fangled movie people compared to the theater stars of their day (who actually had to know how to act)
And how is this is different from movie stars?
A lot of movie stars seem very intelligent and quite conscientious people to me. The directors even more so.
If one of America's main exports is culture, why would you ban factor inputs?
They're also not fungible and extremely mobile. People get attached to specific OF stars and the medium inherently requires remote work. So it's an inherently global labour force that protectionism won't help. American OF models won't magically make more money if you ban immigration unless you also ban cultural imports.
The government isn't displacing local talent by importing OF models and gets tax dollars for essentially doing nothing. Those tax dollars pay for schools/hospitals/etc.
OF also skews towards young, unmarried women, which balances the gender surplus of unmarried men that generally tries to immigrate. Since they're young, they also have more productivity before drawing on benefits like Medicare or Social Security.
By any objective standard OF models are the ideal migrant.
This seems more like importing culture. These content creators aren't coming to work or American creators, they are coming to America to create their content for American audiences or using American resources.
...I get this is HN but come on. It is just modern day JasminCam for lonely men that are being exploited through parasocial relationships. It is the opposite of productive. You just have society feeding on itself.
> exploited
Isn’t that a derogatory stereotype? Aren’t those men (and women and other folks) as “exploited” as a reader of a book or a player of a game, who understands they’re about to be a part of a fantasy but willingly suspend the disbelief for a short while?
It’s only exploitation if this suspension of disbelief is artificially prolonged in nefarious way, with a self-reinforcing fantasy so the person loses touch with the reality and spends increasingly unhealthy amounts of time in a fantasy, or otherwise get conditioned and start to exhibit addiction-like behaviors that aren’t in their best long-term interests.
That happens (every entertainment industry has its whales), but saying it’s the norm (rather than a pathological extremity) is sort of stigmatizing.
It should be stigmatized.
Consent does not bless immoral acts or neutralize damage. A person who takes a drug voluntarily is still being harmed by it. It causes changes in the consumer whether he likes it or not. Causality does not care about your consent.
(And to address your analogy to books, the content of a work of fiction also matters. Reading bad books isn't good for your mind either. But literary fiction at least has the potential to be good. The genre isn't categorically bad.)
And porn is addictive. Porn addiction is extremely widespread and afflicts mostly young men. Porn's ubiquity and the easy with which it can be accessed has created a situation that did not exist before, and from a young age. And not only is it addictive, but it does real psychological damage to these consumers, creating what some call "porn brain". It is an excellent method for producing sexually-crippled creeps and incels unable - and even uninterested, given the nature of their "fantasy" - to have healthy relationships with real human beings, and the stats corroborate this.
It is an incredibly twisted and deranging vice. It destroys individuals and has a destructive impact on society as a whole.
> A person who takes a drug voluntarily is still being harmed by it. It causes changes in the consumer whether he likes it or not.
I’m afraid you’re oversimplifying it. If only things would be this simple. They just never are.
Every experience causes changes (it’s the whole point). And every stimulating experience has a potential to skew your behaviors towards having more of it. Some more, some less, of course, but anything can become a passion and get unhealthy so.
There’s this fine distinction between someone who does something now and then, without significant impairment to their decision-making abilities that cause over-favoring such actions, and those who fail to notice it in time and become overtly obsessed with something.
It’s not about what you do - you can be watching porn or going hiking (or whatever most people would naively deem “good”) - anything can become unhealthy.
I think I understand your point, though. Indeed, pornography consumption nature is intimate and that leaves less opportunities for feedback and self-introspection. That is, noticing the point it becomes more of an obsession. However, dismissing it under a simple “porn is bad” (a tempting idea) is short-sighted by dismissing any nuances, and also harmful - just in different ways (through stigmatization).
Parasocial relationships are inherently exploitive.
I am going to push back here. I follow a variety of YouTubers, and I'm pretty sure that I have a parasocial relationship with most of them. I never heard the term before I watched a Tom Scott video about it. It made perfect sense me, and I saw it in myself. Literally, sometimes I talk to the screen, like we're in the room together. But it's only entertainment, and it's a fun way to "escape" after a long day at the office. I don't take it too seriously. Am I being exploited by a channel of funny people in their 20/30s who fix cars, or lift weights, or talk about relationship problems? I don't think so.
Are all transactions on OF inherently a parasocial relationship? If a dude wants to jerk his schmeat to somebody he thinks is attractive, and pays for access to the media without otherwise engaging, is that parasocial?
You could do that for free. Most are obviously looking for more.
It kind of sounds like you are trying to justify whatever it is you are doing, in which case you do you. I don't actually care what you do and neither should you care what I think.
> You could do that for free. Most are obviously looking for more.
And everyone can use Pornhub for free, yet Pornhub still makes money on their premium subscriptions. Are those also parasocial relationships?
> It kind of sounds like you are trying to justify whatever it is you are doing, in which case you do you.
You know I thought about putting the obligatory "I don't use OF" in my first comment, but felt it wouldn't be necessary. I see that it was; by the way have you stopped beating your wife?
There is a reason why "the oldest profession" is a polite idiom for prostitution.
Calling it "parasocial", doesn't change what it is, but the technology as a mediator does. And society has been feeding on itself since we moved past hunter gatherers.
>There is a reason why "the oldest profession" is a polite idiom for prostitution.
The term only gained popularity at the start of the 1900s, it's a proto-meme
>It is just modern day JasminCam for lonely men that are being exploited through parasocial relationships. It is the opposite of productive.
You can make all the moral judgments you like, but the fact is: They're making money either way, and then spending that money in their local communities. They can spend that money (and pay taxes on it) in the US or not.
It's no different economically than a musician or an actor doing the same.
It was not a moral judgement.
> why Hollywood became the Earth's center of cultural gravity post-WW2
The reason why Hollywood even exists is because it was a way of escaping the enforcement of patents and royalties. And it is easy being the cultural center of the western world when everything other cultural-relevant city in the western hemisphere is somewhat in ruins. Other than that, the lettering is a racist monument of a bygone era.
> You may argue that these people aren't of such import, but I would beg to differ
I'm not a US citizen, but lets face it - there is some irony in seeing some scientists fleeing for abroad offers, some probably deported, and having influencers or glorified strippers benefiting from some ill-thought program.
> These people shape the culture that the young people around you consume.
Do you have kids? I do. People don't give 2 f** about Hollywood or their "stars". Maybe in america. We have our own clowns here, and 15 minutes of fame doesn't require being predated on by some director (thankfully). My daughter couldn't name a single actor even if she wanted to - because movies are (mostly) dead, and series are a commodity. And I'm not saying this as some weirdo who doesn't own a TV or something - we have Disney, SkyShowTime, HBO, Amazon, etc. Its just "kids dont care about that anymore".
> They create the memes of six-seven-ification So, do you know what that means exactly? Are you a Skrilla’s fan? Just asking, because from the tone of your response, you seem to have no idea of the meaning - just like kids saying "theez nuts" or whatever.
Another reason why US media is so dominant: It has the largest population of any English-majority speaking nation. Another thing: English is the second language for an large portion of people under 40 in the world.
I remember when I first learned about the size of the Japenese media market (TV, film, music). It is ENORMOUS. I could not understand how, as 99% of Japanese language speakers live in Japan. Then I realised that Japan is highly developed (wealthy) and has a huge internal market of ~120 million people.
I doubt it. You should ask her. If she is 10 years or older, she certainly has some favourites. If she has social media, ask her who she follows. I am sure there are a bunch of actors & actresses in her list. I'm not saying this to pass any judgement on you as a parent. Only that I doubt the authenticity of your statement.> I doubt it. You should ask her. If she is 10 years or older, she certainly has some favourites. If she has social media, ask her who she follows. I am sure there are a bunch of actors & actresses in her list
16 and nope, she doesnt really care about actors/actresses as she doesnt really follow tv/cinema/streaming; she consumes mostly youtube,f1 and korean stuff. From what I've seen, this is not uncommon.
I think you misunderstood GP's point, that it's now the _influencers_ and social media stars who are shaping culture. Not Hollywood or its stars.
I disagree. I think the attention economy is a new, parallel universe of fame. Yes, old Hollywood and new social media interact and affect each other, but they are still fairly independent. Most Hollywood actors don't have a very large social media presence -- it is probably mostly managed by their PR team. And few social media influencers make it in Hollywood as actors or actresses.
I have no judgement on these models. Everyone can make money through legal means as they deem fit.
But at the same time, the immigration system historically penalized anyone who engages in prostitution and actively denied entry to people found to be engaged in it. There is an explicit question about this in all immigration forms. Which is why it’s surprising that O-1 visas are being awarded to OnlyFans models. Maybe OF isn’t prostitution according to how it’s being interpreted, but it’s very surprising.
If OnlyFans is not prostitution (and in my understanding it is not), then I don't see why it is surprising?
Why should prostitutes not be allowed to immigrate to the US?
Because their abilities are not in the extraordinary artistic abilities category. It's not Hollywood, it's Florida.
That is beyond my pay grade. I’m just stating how the immigration system has worked historically.
how would it be interpreted as prostitution? the close analogue is porn stars right
Well Sweden sure thinks it could be a form of prostitution. While Some form of OF is similar to pornography (pre recorded shows) other is similar to prostitution and therefore illegal (paying for custom live sexual acts). Obviously Sweden isn’t US, but it’s not as clear as “OF is just porn”.
https://www.loc.gov/item/global-legal-monitor/2025-06-10/swe...
Porn comes from pornē, Greek for prostitute. So at least etymologically (and arguably logically as both involve sex for money) porn is prostitution.
If that’s accepted, then I find it hard not to also accept OF as a form of prostitution.
School comes from skholē, Greek for "leisure" or "spare time.".
Therefore people can't be stressed for finals at university, since it's all leisure!
“Etymologically, X comes from Y, therefore X is a form of Y” is quite the jump in logic...
Idk if you mean it literally but conflating the sort of prostitution they ask about on immigration forms with taking naked pictures of yourself seems very wrong.
Disclaimer: I don't mean this comment as an insult to you or anyone else here. It's meant to be slightly tongue in cheek.
I hate to be that person, but the fact that so many people on HN think OF is prostitution is revealing of the site's demographics (i.e. older). It is, as some may put it, boomer thinking.
You're misunderstanding what these people - esports athletes, successful streamers, influencers, OF models etc - actually do. They create and maintain parasocial relationships.
The point isn't just the gameplay or nudes / sex videos or commentary. For e.g., I (and a bunch of other young women for some reason) love to watch Temet https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=go8EJbNaIHg while working. It's the way they reflect back to their audience and allow them to become a part of their performance.
It's kind of like the place where everyone knows your name? These are digital third places and the content (whether it be neon blue bunny hopping characters or a graphic video of someone having sex) is a mechanism for bonding / a part of the activity. Kind of like the alcohol at the pub, I suppose.
That's where real influence comes from in this age.
If you think OF is prostitution, you're fundamentally misunderstanding what will drive power and culture in this century.
There's a strong parasocial element to traditional prostitution, although it's used more by high-end "escorts" who deliberately cultivate conversational skills. So none of this is new.
"My default strategy was this: I would invite the man in, we’d sit down and talk for a while. I’d establish physical contact in the conversation by touching his hand when laughing at a joke, or crossing my leg so it bumped into his. I would become increasingly charmed, utterly fascinated by his life, and I asked him to explain to me concepts I already knew (remember, they like you smart in order to validate their identity as a man who likes smart women, and they still love teaching you things)."
https://knowingless.com/2021/10/19/becoming-a-whorelord-the-...
It’s not the boomer thinking, it’s just mostly talking about semantics. Prostitution is defined as engaging in sexual activity in exchange for payment, which is frowned upon in the immigration system.
Is being in a sugar daddy/baby relationship a form prostitution? Is paying money for a custom private show online where the OF model performs all kinds of sexual acts prostitution? Does prostitution require physical contact? Thats the question of semantics that I am curious about re:immigration.
And these questions aren’t “Boomer mentality”. There is precedent in asking for clear definitions. Sweden makes a distinction between pre recorded only fans work, which is akin to pornography and custom shows which are criminalized, akin to prostitution. https://www.loc.gov/item/global-legal-monitor/2025-06-10/swe...
> I hate to be that person, but the fact that so many people on HN think OF is prostitution is revealing of the site's demographics (i.e. older). It is, as some may put it, boomer thinking.
Well it's not non-existent either, there are a fair number of onlyfans models (and also general actors in the field of pornography who do the same) who do escorting on the side.
“There are a fair number of people in X field who do Y on the side” is a completely and radically different things than “X is a subset of Y.”
Man we're making some giant leaps equating early Hollywood talent with a bunch of modern day internet hoes.
Are we? It feels the same just this time you're the old person and it's your turn to disapprove instead of being in the cultural wave.
The argument from cinema is flaky and a moral critique of Hollywood's influence is unavoidable. But we're talking about porn here, not cinema. This is decadence and depravity. How can you confuse cinema with the construction of an international whoredom? The numbers are also incommensurate.
And TikTok is the antithesis of culture. It's consumerist rubbish that encourages a vapid, thoughtless, and illiterate consumption of shallow material. The article even mentions the monetary motivations of those posting. Any gimmick will do just to make a buck.
Let us not relativize culture. If you relativize it, then your argument falls apart anyway. Authentic culture serves human beings. It involves learning from, developing, deepening, refining, and correcting what came before. Trash content doesn't do this. It is cultural poison. It ruins people's minds and wrecks society.
This use of O-1 visas is merely another sign of the downward trajectory of our polity. We are following Plato's description of social decline perfectly. Perhaps aesthetically, it is fitting that Trump is the poster boy of this abuse of O-1 visas, but he is at best an emanation and a catalyst of broader and deeper social and cultural processes. In the absence of a minimum of sound moral authority, you can expect the poison that lurks in the mud to hatch out and begin to dominate the polis.
>And TikTok is the antithesis of culture. It's consumerist rubbish that encourages a vapid, thoughtless, and illiterate consumption of shallow material. The article even mentions the monetary motivations of those posting. Any gimmick will do just to make a buck.
My brother, you've just described modern American culture perfectly.
What's the difference between Hollywood popcorn films and corn?
> Let us not relativize culture. If you relativize it, then your argument falls apart anyway. Authentic culture serves human beings. It involves learning from, developing, deepening, refining, and correcting what came before. Trash content doesn't do this. It is cultural poison. It ruins people's minds and wrecks society.
The walls of Pompeii beg to differ.
https://pompeiiarchaeologicalpark.com/social-norms-and-eroti...
https://mariasorensen.substack.com/p/the-forbidden-erotic-ar...
https://www.popularmechanics.com/science/archaeology/a627393...
I am sure there would have been people at the time decrying the creation of pigments and paints as the fall of civilization due to "decadence and depravity." Didn't matter much, did it?
> We are following Plato's description of social decline perfectly
Plato was a wrestler. Plato would like totally be a gym bro, bro.
It has been a while since I've read Republic, but I remember Book 8 differently. To quote the IEP,
This summary matches my recollection more closely than yours. Could you please quote primary sources on what exactly you mean by "Plato's description of social decline?"But influencers are by default distributed and don't really need to be in a single place. Most of their collabs are in luxurious venues around the world (Because we live in a world worshipping rich stuff but that s another matter)
Plus AI porn is already a thing
All of the exotic acting talent in the world won't save an industry that's forgotten the very basics of how to make a good movie.
>These people shape the culture that the young people around you consume. They create the memes of six-seven-ification.
I'd disagree, six-seven-ification is caused by the human desire for clout and tribal motivations - I'd argue that social currency is the reason people pursue fiat currency; ask yourself this, if I have you $100 billion, but you could not interact with any human beings from then on, would that $100 billion still matter?
Rather than influencers forcing memes, "six-seven-ification" arises organically from the authors' pursuing of belonging/clout within a tribe. What I would say is more interesting is that the lifetime of such cultural outputs is becoming more and more fleeting.
For Millenials & gen X our memes seemed to have quite a bit of permanence over the years. For the boomers and silent generations before us, their cultures were even more static (and traditional) by comparison. For gen z/a it seems their cultural language changes month to month, sometimes week to week.
Memes aren't enjoyed for years now, they're enjoyed for a few months. Horizontally spinning rat, Coffin dance, etc are all ancient history now.
And you can see the reaction to this; there are spikes in search interest on a lot of classic (2005-2015) memes, Gen Z is desperately embracing retro tech like camcorders, polaroids and 90s/00s outfits in a snap back to reality. The gravity of this cannot be understated.
Mom's spaghetti.
The title is misleading. It says “dominating” however no sources or percentages are provided. And later in the article it only says “increasingly applying”, with just two examples.
I do have a friend (very popular drummer-YouTuber who makes covers, has millions of subs) who did get an O visa because he actually is a, kinda, celebrity, so I guess this is indeed happening occasionally. But nothing is being “dominated” here.
To be clear: TFA is a thinly veiled legal services advertisement ("submarine" in HN parlance), so "dominated" is being used as a hype-generation / reality distortion term.
That said, the reality of today is so-called influencers and OF sex workers are now becoming a relevant fraction of applicants compared to the past where they represented 0%. Is it possible fixating on the word "dominating" a bit overly pedantic?
There is already a lot going on here without pedantry.
I would also note that, even if the title is accurate, and (say) 90% of applications are from social media influencers, it doesn't even make a claim about how many are granted. It could be that countless influencers are applying... and being rejected.
One of my past manager was on a O-1 (in a tech company); he was from india. So, it goes like this, you register to be a presenter in a conference, copy some material from another tech talk and (re-)present it there as a novelty (rince and repeat). Pretty Simple. Step #2, create your facebook, youtube channel (etc.) and buy subscribers (from mediamister.com, getafollower.com, views4you.com, socialwick.com, buzzoid.com, etc) which is perfectly legal; he must have spent 10% of his salary to buy millions of subscribers; and that's how he's been working in tech for the past 10+ years.
Do you have evidence this was true? This sounds like a good story but I thought getting these visas was mostly about revenue receipts, and if he bought a lot of subscribers, they must've been subscribing to something that paid him.
Outside of naming and shaming the guy, what kind of evidence are you asking for?
To my knowledge an O-1 visa isn't about revenue receipts.
You're right! I looked it up. It's not about followers either though:
https://www.uscis.gov/policy-manual/volume-2-part-m-chapter-...
I'm not asking for evidence. I'm asking if he has evidence.
This is just a sad read. And probably worth an in-depth article.
Most of the scientists and engineers I know are on different visas. The US has gained a ton from being largely the cultural center of the world so it's good that there's a visa to take in cultural figures (even if I don't personally connect with influencer culture). As social media is new and fairly spread out, especially compared to traditional recipients like models and actors, it seems really unsurprising they are a ton of these now. I would say the problem is less we are taking in influencers and more we aren't accepting other people.
Immigrants are taking American handjobs!
dude i chuckled really hard on that one, thanks for that
> The O-1 category includes the O-1A, which is designated for individuals with extraordinary ability in the sciences, education, business or athletics and the O-1B, reserved for those with “extraordinary ability or achievement”.
> My whole thing is being the funny Jewish girl with big boobs.
The O-1B category is broad because it's mostly entertainment based so there's more squishy room two of the requirements match a Top OF model though.
> Evidence of a record of major commercial or critically acclaimed successes in the performing arts, as shown by box office receipts or record, cassette, compact disk, or video sales
> Evidence of having commanded a high salary or other significantly high remuneration for services in relation to others
A high earning OF model ticks both of those boxes pretty easily. We don't want to put dollar amounts on it to only attract movie stars because other professions don't pay as well would be blocked out and an explicit filter on (heh) explicit O1 visas would be a content based restriction that would (or at least imo should) be a 1A infringement. [0]
https://www.pathlawgroup.com/o1b-visa-requirements/
[0] IMO a 1A restriction to who can come to the country is defacto a restriction on speech in the country.
> My whole thing is being the funny Jewish girl with big boobs.
I thought that was Rachel Bloom.
Is she passing the torch to the next generation?
Anyway, it's not that different from having the extraordinary ability of having hand-eye-coordination on a 7-foot frame.
Actually, it falls under OF-1 visa category.
People are getting hung up on definitions of extraordinary. The thing you need to understand is that US immigration is a political blackhole. The main pathways to immigrate to the US are family, misery (asylum, refugee, tps), or luck (diversity). Employment or economic immigration is frowned upon and visas like H-1B are limited and exploitative and still ultimately politically unpopular as the masses don't want to compete. So, that leaves O-1 as an escape hatch for a basic economic immigration visa that won't rile up the masses. Afterall, a chud does not reasonably believe that an influencer or a pornstar is stealing his job. So it goes.
I wonder how much "OnlyFans models applying for O-1 visas" is just sex trafficking with a thin veneer
O1 would probably want to see a huge number of followers. An OG model with a large following is someone with a huge amount of agency. Probably the highest agency sex worker of them all. Impossible to traffic
I wonder how much of the follower count is addressable. You can call to action for political followers but as a porn actor your values ends where your flesh stops being shown.
[flagged]
Is an O-1 the "model visa"?
Because OF models are models... so I wonder if model management companies are upset about folks selling content directly to consumers without abusive middle management and drumming up outrage to protect their shitty business model.
Say what you want about sites like OF, but at least the performers get a huge chunk of the earnings.
If you are a professional in a sphere like engineering, then getting eg 10k views on your videos is very remarkable and acts as a indirect proof of acclaim. But when it is the whole metric, then it just overvalues public professions where in itself 10k views is nothing remarkable. That's the core issue as far as I understand.
(But even for professionals, it's a very gameable metric. There is a whole industry that helps getting published material and appearances for O-1 applications.)
Proof of interest, not acclaim. And online interest is heavily skewed to the narrow activities of entertainment and education - professional community communication happens but in far smaller numbers vs the other two.
By 1994, I was in triumphant optimism. I was young-ish, my country was in for its most beautiful decade ever, and the internet seemed to herald a time of final Liberation, with the Earth becoming home to a single, global scientist-philosopher society.
And so, suddenly, we find ourselves mired between traditionalist discomfort and pragmatic acceptance, an unglamorous terminus for earlier dreams of Human synthesis.
fun-fact: Melania got an "Einstein Visa" shortly after she started dating the president
https://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-43256318
and the owner of the modeling agency she came from "committed suicide" in prison
Celebrities are getting visas instead of celebrities? Ok. I don't see the issue.
Interestingly, the O-1 can also be used for Software Engineers.
Given the amount of unemployed Software Engineers, it makes sense to reduce H1-Bs in that category.
Companies can still hire exceptional people from overseas using this O-1 visa.
How is "extraordinary ability" defined? At what point does an influencer or OF model (or a traditional actor for that matter) have enough "extortionary ability" to get the visa?
Why do they need a visa for remote work?
Because they want to stay longer than tourist visas allow. And because most places (US definitely included) don't let you work remotely on a tourist visa either, with a few exceptions that wouldn't cover them sufficiently.
They wanna taste american life. Reality is gonna hit hard sooner or later
Ok, but who else still want to go to USA lately?
I hope the best for every people out there, including every usa citizen, but money alone won't attract every human profile under the sun, and unleashed imperialism which don't even pretend to export democracy anymore is doing nothing good for the the image of the country I'm afraid.
What a world really! Take care everything, might safety and peace remain on you and your relatives.
It is for this reason I am grateful to be a gen xr. I was at the end of my 20s when social media blew up, so it wasn’t a meaningful part of my personal development. I cannot bring myself to look at IG and the hot mess it serves up daily. A hyper focused lens on the potential of human desperation and stupidity.
I don’t hate on the younger generation, I feel bad they grew up with this shit and try to be a positive influence.
I see people of legit talent from doctors, to chemists and musicians dedicate themselves to posting content. What people don’t understand is survivor bias. For every success story you read about, how many people are going in reverse and not experiencing social mobility (and get depressed from it).
How do you know that the followers are not bots? It seems that on platforms with a clear bot problem like X, it would be relatively easy to hit that 1M target if you are willing to pay a bot farm.
Remnants of a late stage empire. The US peaked out over 20 years ago.
true
America becoming the physical and virtual brothel of the world.
OK I've got to know...which of these does OF fall under
>extraordinary ability in the sciences, education, business or athletics
That's for only one of the subtypes of visa. The official site (https://www.uscis.gov/working-in-the-united-states/temporary...) mentions a few more options, which would probably turn out to cover onlyfans if you get the right sort of professional advice:
> The O-1 nonimmigrant visa is for the individual who possesses extraordinary ability in the sciences, arts, education, business, or athletics, or who has a demonstrated record of extraordinary achievement in the motion picture or television industry and has been recognized nationally or internationally for those achievements
That's O-1A. O-1B: Individuals with an extraordinary ability in the arts or extraordinary achievement in motion picture or television industry.
I can easily see how 3 of the 4 categories mentioned here could fit.
If you ever get a chance with one of these women you'll learn its all of them
I've seen some bedroom activities that I would definitely categorize as requiring extraordinary athletic abilities...
My guess is business (if they are doing well on the platform)
Has to be athletics right?
Webcam athletics
I mostly don’t care about influencers and OnlyFan, but that… Seems fine to me?
If you managed to amass 1M followers you clearly have strong abilities as an entertainer. The fact that the medium is different than what used to be the norm shouldn’t have an impact.
As a strategy for strengthening our national economy it is great, as a larger cultural/societal marker it is bleak.
And before that it was DJ's and "Dancers", btw.
Hardly a surprise considering how much more people have entered OF in the last few years.
I struggle to understand who pays for OF content and who follows them ? From what I've read 99% of OF is porn in some form or another. So there are millions of people who create accounts and pay for it - linking their personnal info to this thing ?
As for the visa, it's not surprising and obviously idiotic for the society, but from the 'merit' standpoints it feels about right - if somebody has 10M followers, it's not that different from a radio or tv star.
just make it $ contingent OF models make ordinary income if someone is pulling in several million USD a year they are going to be paying a ton of taxes here. What is the downside?
Golden age!!
Try now to convince a young person to become a doctor or an engineer, when an OF individual can make in a day what they will make in 40y, assuming they found a job anyway. Idiocracy was a glimpse into the future, not a movie.
Couldn't the same be said of all professions in which some people earn a lot, such as acting, sports, singing, entertainment in general, and which are considered less “serious” than the professions of medical doctor and engineer?
One might say that, in theory, the well-earning actor or actress has to show some craft at least, but there are plenty of actors whose popularity comes only from their looks--my dog would act better than them.
A lot of the youngsters who'd decide to make money undressing themselves on OF will soon realize they might have the will, but they lack the market power.
That's because you compare a median doctor/engineer with the best OF individuals. Wouldn't you want to compare them with Sergey Brin/Thomas Frist in this case.
Good, EU/AU are playing dirty when it comes to the fight between traditional social media. I'm glad the best talent continues to come to America.
Good lord at some of these comments. Sex work is work. Stop imposing your personal morals on others. You sound like a bunch of incels.
Whatever the case may be, this has nothing to do with morals, but rather with classification of it as an "extraordinary" ability. Talking about that, instead of seething and name-calling, you could show us your extraordinary ability to go back to Reddit.
I don’t have a Reddit fam, but I’m sorry if you’ve never seen a porn featuring extraordinary abilities.
I agree that sex work is work but it's no extraordinary ability.
You obviously haven’t seen what I’ve seen.
The hole-one visa... how fitting.
Says a lot about who actually wants to and is willing to relocate there…
So what does it say about the fact that Europe's immigration is dominated by skill-less and jobless migrants and refugees?
We are all pretty happy!
Also, I’m sorry you think cam girls and people who #ad carbonated water are considered skilled in the context of work and contributing to society meaningfully..
> “I don’t think [people] realize how much work actually goes into it,” she said. “You might not agree with the way the money is being made, or what people are watching, but people are still watching and paying for it.”
Oh lovely, we're becoming a Grifters' Republic of Social Media.
[flagged]
[dead]
[dead]
[flagged]
How is this relevant?
Presumably it's a Great Replacement dog whistle and the implication is that OnlyFans is a Jewish conspiracy to make white men impotent and to replace them with a different/preffered demographic. Total antisemitic garbage (and not in the sense that "any criticism of AIPAC is antisemitism," but actual and old school antisemitism).
It's conceivable that that isn't what they mean but I doubt it. Let's just flag that comment and move on, it's flamebait of the worst order.
[flagged]
"Whoever knowingly transports any individual in interstate or foreign commerce, or in any Territory or Possession of the United States, with intent that such individual engage in prostitution, or in any sexual activity for which any person can be charged with a criminal offense, shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than five years, or both"
Filming porn isn't prostitution nor a sexual activity for which any person can be charged with a criminal offense. Hope this helps.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IlbAMdDry4A
The area seems greyer when, as happens in some operations, one person A is getting paid to have sex, and the other person B having the sex is paying person A, even if B is filming the sex and selling the video.
If they wanted to make that point, then they should have made that point instead of quoting a snippet of legislation of dubious relevance to an article that devoted more lines to chess influencers, fashion influencers, and musicians, than porn stars.
I think it's naïve to think that these girls are only very strictly selling feet images and are not in the business of having sex for money as well.
Especially when you consider the top-heavy success distribution. Sure there's influencers that have 100M views, but theres thousands of influencers with 300 views, are they going to be just happy with selling pictures for 10 bucks? Or will they follow the whales until they are paid to be flown into the prostitution assembly line, with or without visas.
Beyond the click-bait title, what does this have to do with the article?
Apparently porn is sex for money, but legally it's not prostitution. So in that case, these OF influencers can just bill their private services as coaching lessons for aspiring actors.
No one said law was consistent or made sense.
You see comrade, the government represents all of us, so when the government deems something beneficial and worth doing we all benefit /s
Me dumping oil on the ground -> bad.
megacorp paying some engineers to make up a number for just how much oil is ok to dump on the ground and paying for government permission -> good
Diddy flying hoes around -> bad
OF models paying the .gov to fly around -> good
(I'm joking here, but not nearly as much as I wish I was)
>OF models paying the .gov to fly around -> good
Yes, with Republican govs, they can pay the government directly for a Golden Visa.
But with Democrat governments it's a bit more fair, they have to pay an immigration lawyer at 300$/hr with John money to get in instead. /s
At least it's better than them going in with a B1 visa and doing whatever.
Sorry for the politics dang.