> 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.
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
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.
> > 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.
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. 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”
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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).
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.
> 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.
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.
>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.
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.
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.
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.
> 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'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)."
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)
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.
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.
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.
> 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]
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?
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.
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
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 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.
"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.
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.
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
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
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?
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
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.
> 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.
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. 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”
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.
Yet CR7 is routinely photographed baring himself on camera, which is one of the reasons he's so popular.
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.
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.
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.
what is the difference?
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.
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 :)
Kinda funny this comment is downvoted!
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).
Tale as old as time.
Dial M for Melania.
Which one did Melania qualify for? Type O 1A or O 1B?
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.
> 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."
:-)
> 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.
> 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.
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.
Parasocial relationships are inherently exploitive.
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.
>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.
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.
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.
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.
If OnlyFans is not prostitution (and in my understanding it is not), then I don't see why it is surprising?
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.
> 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'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-...
how would it be interpreted as prostitution? the close analogue is porn stars right
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.
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
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.
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.
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.
Actually, it falls under OF-1 visa category.
You have to remember, OnlyFan founders are very big on AIPAC lobby.
How is this relevant?
I wonder how much "OnlyFans models applying for O-1 visas" is just sex trafficking with a thin veneer
it’s prostitution. they’re not models, calling them that taints that word.
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.
> 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.
Immigrants are taking American handjobs!
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?
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.
Why do they need a visa for remote work?
They wanna taste american life. Reality is gonna hit hard sooner or later
Hardly a surprise considering how much more people have entered OF in the last few years.
America becoming the physical and virtual brothel of the world.
Celebrities are getting visas instead of celebrities? Ok. I don't see the issue.
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)
Webcam athletics
Has to be athletics right?
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 agree that sex work is work but it's no extraordinary ability.
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.
The hole-one visa... how fitting.
"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.
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)
Remnants of a late stage empire. The US peaked out over 20 years ago.