Hacker News Reader

Comment by superfrank | Hacker News Reader

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.

View on HN

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.

> 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.

Wait until you hear about porn stars!

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.

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.

    > 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.

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".

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

> 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...

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.

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.)

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.

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.

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

It's not that they need to be in the country; they want to be in the country.

I guess they branch out to more traditional porn industry, even if it's not obvious from their profiles?

> 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.

TBH the president's (current) wife came in on an O1 visa too - as was the original intent like you said.

It's the difference in difficulty for the criteria.

https://www.pathlawgroup.com/o1b-visa-requirements/

    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.

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 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?

edit

https://news.ycombinator.com/leaders

See "Lists" in the footer: https://news.ycombinator.com/lists

Huh.

#7 nice!

I never knew when I'd stop posting, but now I have a target

:-D ++1

But does it count then?

> 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#... )

    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 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.

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.

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

Well if your audience is larger than an average CNN show, and you earn north of a million a year, don't you qualify?

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 am not an expert, but I would guess there is a lot of "pushing oneself to the limit" on OF...

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

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?

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.

It worked for melania!

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.

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.

what is the difference?

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'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 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

Never, none of this shit matters

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.

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.

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/

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

Professional sports is. Difference between professional sports and sports is like prostitution/OF/porn and sex.

Uh hum.

players are frequently "bought" and "sold" based off of their physical attributes? It's literally turning your body into a tradable good.

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.

+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.

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.

Entertainment is an industry :)

It would be unwise to filter out the fun people. We'd all become a bunch of unfun nerds.

Kinda funny this comment is downvoted!

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.

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?

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.

    > visas that were formerly reserved for performing musicians would not necessarily make sense

I don't think the O1/2 visas in the United States are capped. There is no annual limit.

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.

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.

> 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.

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 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.

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…

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.

> 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.

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 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.

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

Reply on news.ycombinator.com