Hacker News new | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submit login


Should we consider banking a disreputable industry because of actors like Goldman Sachs? Should we consider mining a disreputable industry because of the deaths and cover ups? How about human trafficking for diamond mines? Should we consider the jewelry industry disreputable? How iPhone productions and Foxconn? Seriously the list can go on, every industry has parts of it that are less than reputable. If you think porn is somehow worse, that’s because of your morality or religions beliefs and not the facts.

> Should we consider banking a disreputable industry because of actors like Goldman Sachs?

And Wells Fargo. And Bank of America. And HSBC. But yes, any one of them is enough.

Mining is disreputable because of endemic pollution externalities and worker safety violations. Jewelry is disreputable from cartelization and the FUD regarding synthetics. Foxconn is disreputable because of worker suicides and the Chinese government's apparent political interest in advancing its high-tech manufacturing by any means necessary.

Prurient businesses are disreputable for several reasons, and one of them is the self-reinforcing reason that they are forced into using grey-market payments processors, because their industry is disreputable with respect to customer payments fraud.

So you don't purchase gemstones as investments, you don't let Goldman Sachs handle your IPO without a lot of scrutiny and supervision, and you don't trust the clay lining under the mine's leach pond. And you don't let adult entertainment businesses do card-not-present transactions. The industry attracts bad actors because there's money in it, demand is high, customers have their respectability masks off, and it has less personal accountability than other types of work.

The businesses that have a reputation problem regarding its suppliers getting paid reliably are going to have the worst problems. Everyone else can clean up their problems with lawyers after the fact, with the money they have already been paid, but if your problem can prevent you from getting paid in the first place...

Goldman Sachs never has that problem. Ensuring they always get paid first is apparently part of their culture. That's why they're always the ones making out like bandits while everyone else is dropping like flies. They might stab you in the back, but they won't ever fold up and collapse underneath you. Their office will always be open to accept your civil complaint or welcome the regulator/examiner or government's attorney. And their corporate executives will always be eager to repay your Secretary of the Treasury nomination, or seat on the Fed board of governors, with truckloads of hard money and soft money to support your political campaigns. They might not be reputable, but they are respectable.

Prurient business lacks even that, for the very reasons you mention. If you don't have the respect, you will never get the reputation, no matter how reliable you may be.

From my limited experience talking to people working in this space, the violence / human trafficking portion is not really a problem in the adult entertainment space. At least, many models definitely work voluntarily. I think trafficking is more of a potential issue at the shady ends of prostitution.

The downside of the adult entertainment industry is that you did hear of tales of questionable employers... it's less "violence" and more environments and/or tactics that sometimes seemed shady or unethical. There was also tales of drugs, sure. Also the pay is often relatively lousy. IMHO your best bet to avoid shady places is to support models / producers / etc. at an individual level, which is more possible these days thanks to the Internet.

(To be honest the industry it reminded me of the most is the music industry. Which has similar bits of shady employers / work environments here and there, similar drug issues, similar lousy pay, and a similar scenario where the best way to avoid the shady parts is directly supporting the non-shady artists and venues as much as possible.)

It makes sense that you wouldn't see much trafficking in the porn space under the "don't film your crimes you moron" rule.

They metioned "Porn performers/activists", while the violence and everything else will be from the producers/"pimps" involved.

> I'm finding it difficult to believe this given that it's known that pornography is known to be an industry riddled with violence, hard drugs, human trafficking and so on and so forth.

Known by who? Source?

> Edit: As soon as I posted this I see the other commenter outed you as having an inherent benefit from tricking people into believing pornography is a reputable industry.

What are you talking about? I see nothing like this anywhere in the comments section.

Not saying the industry is reputable, but the people are super nice and really don't judge.

Applications are open for YC Winter 2020

Guidelines | FAQ | Support | API | Security | Lists | Bookmarklet | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact