I am not a lawyer. But OF models using O1 visa is totally fine. It is the intended purpose. The visa itself is meant for researchers, scholars who have job offers, athletes, actors etc. it has no cap and clear criteria. OF models who make a lot of money should totally qualify for this.
Also this visa in uncapped so giving visas to OF models does not take away anything from scientists and others.
O visa's original intent was to help pretty ladies from Eastern Europe to be brought into the country as indentured workers. That is why it is so easy to get this visa for an actor or a fashion model but very tough to get someone for their research.
I thought the reason for this to be a visa is because their fields' activities were in-person (acting in movies/plays/shows, academic life & research, sports training & leagues, etc). A streamer / OF worker is not like that as far as I know (but e-sports is). So this is purely to bring people with money and/or influence, nothing exceptional except the number of 0's.
What I know from news articles is that some of them openly "escort", like some traditional porn stars did more quietly. The fame on the screen can be brand-building for the even more lucrative in-person work.
As one said in a quote, regarding AI threat and crumbling economies: "The oldest profession will be the last profession."
If some of them want to move to the US right now, from currently healthier countries, one reason may be that social inequality means there are many deep-pocketed customers able to pay 5 figures for a weekend experience.
The decline of the US means that there will be increasingly fewer deep-pocketed customers able to pay 5 figures for anything.
Those who come to the US with enough money on the bank will have access to a lifestyle and experiences that are becoming more and more exclusive, which makes for great content for the peasant class to consume on their phones.
> The decline of the US means that there will be increasingly fewer deep-pocketed customers able to pay 5 figures for anything.
Those at the top are doing very well, it's those without access to capital who are struggling. America in decline looks like a bifurcated economy where low-paying jobs catering to the desires of the wealthy take up an increasingly large share of the economy. You can decide for yourself to what extent this is already happening.
A world war and a socialist-minded president could correct that for a good couple of decades but this time the US is going to be on the wrong side of history.
As an outsider, it's interesting to watch Nero play the fiddle while the rest of the world sanctions the US (except India and the Middle East and Taiwan). I think this is how the average Roman felt during Honorius' reign.
US invading Greenland means all US troops in Europe risk getting captured/foxholed in their own military bases. That's 65k permanent staff and 20-35k on rotation. Or 10% of the US military, simply turning PoW (and a huge bargaining chip so early in the conflict).
It will also signal to the world that America is no longer world police, which means the Middle East, Japan and Taiwan will once again come under threat. The Middle East already foresaw this, which is why Saudi Arabia, Turkey and Pakistan are building a regional nuclear-enabled alliance, with open invitation to the other oil economies. Taiwan is most likely to get caught with their pants down, given the lack of US military support.
Interestingly, with the exist of the US from NATO, the largest military in NATO will be Turkey's, that country that Europe has long considered the unwanted bastard child.
That's fantasy. I seriously doubt Trump will invade Greenland, but even if so, there will be zero consequences for U.S. forces in Europe. Europe's armed forces are not capable of taking on U.S. troops in Europe.
Conversely -- declining countries usually have a lot of deep-pocketed customers, and mind less of whether their crimes go public. They also tend to care less of spending money in wasteful ways, as those money were easily earned.
I wouldn't prophesize the 'decline' of the US, but if you're sufficiently wealthy, the kind of services and lifestyle options (like living in a luxury apartment overlooking the sea, or decent medical care), is available in a lot of places nowadays.
Well it's already declining. Remove the AI and tech industry and the US economy is in literal decline. Invading Greenland ensures NATO is crippled, Taiwan is left undefended and China finds a great excuse to impose sanctions on the US as part of a coordinated effort. That's a huge chunk of the semiconductor manufacturing lifecycle that becomes inaccessible to the US.
USA is doing pretty well and far from decline not withstanding local minimas they might hit.
When economic outlook is bad, it is generally the middle class and lower class that gets hit the hardest and women in these categories end up joining sin professions. Vegas always sees a big boom in 21 year olds in strip clubs when economy is bad.
Right now strip clubs are full of 35+ women why ? All the young ones are on OF. It is safer and much cleaner way of making money
I believe they are implying that the US itself isn't in a healthy state. Economic disparity mostly, but also politically, socially, and likely physically. I think many would agree.
It increases the countries' soft power if people around the world watch content from there.
Eg. a self-reinforcing cycle that you get the best from the other immigrant categories arriving because they choose the country where everything "seems to be happening".
> I thought the reason for this to be a visa is because their fields' activities were in-person (acting in movies/plays/shows, academic life & research, sports training & leagues, etc). A streamer / OF worker is not like that as far as I know (but e-sports is).
Just like film work (which it is a kind of, in a sense), any place can be an OF set, but you need a set and, for performances with more than one performer, you generally need the performers at the same set. Physical proximity to both sets that you want to use and other performers who you might do recurring joint performances with seem to have obvious utility.
As I understand it [1], usually if you try to cross the border declaring you intend to engage in sex work, they turn you away. Some combination of prudishness and concern about trafficking.
For there to be a special sex worker visa is a surprise, to me.
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.
> A streamer / OF worker is not like that as far as I know (but e-sports is).
Well Streamer vs Influencer can be different potentially, that said I can think of one example even for video game streamers, that being the AGDQ charity event where speedrunners/streamers do stuff live for charity at the event space.
> I thought the reason for this to be a visa is because their fields' activities were in-person (acting in movies/plays/shows, academic life & research, sports training & leagues, etc). A streamer / OF worker is not like that as far as I know
An OnlyFans worker may make the bulk of her money by meeting fans in person for dates. That can't be done over the internet.
While possible to be for physical sex work, I think the previous commenter meant by meeting fans, would be like at a meet-and-greet at a Con, so they can further increase the parasocial relationship with the people giving them subscriptions, signing autographs. Also, they may be doing collabs with other content creators, just as comedians and actors will be on each others podcasts.
INA §212(a)(2)(D) renders inadmissible any alien who:
(i) is coming to the United States solely, principally, or incidentally to engage in prostitution, or has engaged in prostitution within 10 years of the date of application for a visa, admission, or adjustment of status,
(ii) directly or indirectly procures or attempts to procure, or (within 10 years of the date of application for a visa, admission, or adjustment of status) procured or attempted to procure or to import, prostitutes or persons for the purpose of prostitution, or receives or (within such 10-year period) received, in whole or in part, the proceeds of prostitution, or
(iii) is coming to the United States to engage in any other unlawful commercialized vice, whether or not related to prostitution
Obviously these people should be applying for EB-1s since that is the established visa program for prostitutes.
If they stream the sex on their OF feed, then it's not prostitution. Even if model is paid by the other person, it would be difficult to legally separate it from any other adult entertainment contract.
> An OnlyFans worker may make the bulk of her money by meeting fans in person for dates.
I don't believe it. Do you have any evidence? As I understand, the money is made two ways: (1) regular subscriptions and (2) whales that pay for extra content. Also, most of them have private chat and email, which I assume is serviced offshore from somewhere like the Philippines where it is cheap and easy to hire English speakers.
Until they retire and need end of life Medicare which is very expensive.
That's why some countries like Dubai have devised a work visa system that lets people work for decades but never lets them become citizens so Dubai can kick out the moment they stop working, before they need end of life care.
OF models make money until a certain age though. Sure, not too different to the current job market you could argue, but usually any "influencer" career today is quite short lived if you haven't a very specific niche.
In my country prostitution is legal, but I think some countries are very hypocritical here about OF.
In all car reviews, driver impressions and forums, there is near universal and near unanimous preference for physical buttons for common control like volume and climate control. It is beyond me why anyone would experiment with something that is like 100 year old tech and loved by people.
I hope Apple Carplay and Google Android auto can also take over other car control such as volume and climate control. Later someone can build uniform hardware buttons and knobs that I can place on my steering wheel and it can use the phone to control those features.
India supreme court is bonkers and often known for its BS judgements devoid of logic and law.
Aadhar is "identity", it is not a "card" of any kind though Indians have inherent love for collecting various cards for fun. I have my driving license, PAN, aapar, kisan and state government health insurance cards, labor department id card. I have few more in some drawer.
Once a person gets aadhar, it acts pretty much same as OAuth. You go to a hotel to get a room, Hotel by law is required to verify that your name and face match. You give your aadhar card to them which they scan on their computer and verify that your name matches your face. Because they are a hotel they have right to only verify that.
This is much more privacy preserving than what supreme court did. Because of Supreme Court, hotels no long bother to implement this and instead demand your passport and other identification, scan it and leave it in their system forever. They also are known to sell this data to other from time to time.
The technical idea behind was aadhar was similar to UPI. Government runs the core infra with basic APIs but private companies build apps on top of it. For example, say GPay builds aadhar interface where when you walk into a hotel to reserve a room, Gpay automatically generates a new aadhar number with permissions only to show your name, photo and age. Hotel system verifies that and stores a receipt. If in future government is investigating who stayed in which room, law enforcement can convert these receipts to identification.
This was a better model which would have unlocked a lot of potential. The government failed to argue the case correctly and supreme court acted more like an activist court.
I do think both Government and Supreme Court failed to show the correct user journey here.
I’d love to see a citation for a Hotel being legally allowed access to the Aadhaar KUA system, even before the Supreme Court judgement. No hotel in India does this, because Aadhaar as implemented is a “honor based system” for the majority of usecases where a photocopy of a Aadhaar (with or without QR) is assumed to be valid.
In comparison, a Voter ID and PAN are both hologram protected and forgeries are easily detected.
W3C verifiable credentials do not require a singular identity source, they work perfectly fine with multiple issuers.
Not op,I agree that hotels doesn't do any face matching.
However for getting a new mobile connection the flow is similar to what op has mentioned. It seems one can get a mobile connection by not opting for face recognition, but the process is cumbersome. Similarly for property registrations fingerprints (atleast in some of the states) of the concerned parties is matched against the ones that are associated with their Aadhar.
Yes, because Telcos are designated as AUAs, and expected to do a full KYC under DoT regulations. Hotels are not.
I have two SIMs, and I surprisingly got the newer of them in 20 minutes at a remote village in India without an Aadhaar. Telcos do a Liveness check with their phone instead these days.
> and instead demand your passport and other identification, scan it and leave it in their system forever. They also are known to sell this data to other from time to time.
Isn't this the problem vs the Supreme court judgement? Why does the hotel need to save this data forever?
A simple fix will be to make companies liable for leaks of personal data. That alone will incentivize then to delete personal data as fast as humanly possible.
Indians have this crazy love for idiotic paperwork and nitpicking around paperwork, coupled with mostly low IQ and less educated clerks everywhere it becomes worse. I once submited my PAN and Passport to the bank who refused it claiming the spellings of both names do not match as my middle name was shortened on PAN card. I showed them that my photo is present on both and both cards belong to the same person. But nopes.
A friend then showed me that he downloaded aadhar PSD online, put a random invalid number, his photo and a non-existent address on the bank and used it everywhere where people were asking for aadhar without any need. Building and Airport security, Hotel reservation staff, Bus tickets and so on and used real aadhar only for banking and sim cards. He said this simplifies life a lot.
This is the ultimate facade of Digital Identity that UIDAI lets happen while sitting idly by. They put a circular against “Aadhaar photocopies not being valid” only to rescind it the next day because everyone made fun of them.
The truth, as you point out, is that Aadhaar in reality is a an “honour based system”, where UIDAI pretends everything is valid and authenticated as long as it gets used everywhere.
In India you have to cheat just to get things done at all due to how nonsensically strict things are, which leads to increased scrutiny due to cheating, which leads to more need for non-cheaters to cheat just to get things done, which leads to increased scrutiny due to cheating…
As for the low IQ thing no one wants to acknowledge it but check the charts and see that it’s true. Centuries of caste based inbreeding and colonial clerk education will do that to a population. The added toxins in the turmeric will finish the job.
For anyone reading this the following context would be helpful:
1. Home schooling does not necessarily (and in most cases) does not mean a kid learning at home with parents. It only means parents have arranged for adequen learning through alternative means.
2. In many cases, multiple parents and their kids come together and take responsibility of their kids education. They may rent spaces, they may hire teachers and so on.
3. In many cases you have to satisfy government penpushers that you are doing a good job of this.
Thats a dumb metric. It is like saying conditioned on a doctor saw you, how many people were saved. You gotta count folks who died because they did not see the doctor too.
Some of the unicorns could be simply rent seekers making money by colluding with government people. Investors saw them sure shot and hence invested. That model is neither scalable not healthy.
India too has been adding more green cover than ever. Higher CO2 in atmosphere leads to faster growth of forests. But more important factor is urbanization for India. As people move to cities the need to cut down trees goes down.
You'll read about some 70 year old woman/man in an obscure village who's reforested thousands of acres on their own, or resuscitated a lake (e.g. the lake guy in Bengaluru).
But there's little effort to harness their knowledge in a systematic way, add knowledge from others into the knowledge bank, do peer review, and then systematically dispense the knowledge in the form of a kit to environmentalists and bureaucrats across the country. China did this, and that's why they're so successful.
I would love for you to point me in the direction of the knowledge-bases (peer-reviewed ones) that these organizations have produced. If you can also point me in the direction of the kits they've produced, that would be extra sweet.
If you don't, readers of this comment are going to assume there aren't any, and you're just doing an ego-defense of Indian "capability".
A real tree grown from scratch is a real proof of real work while peer review is nothing but an example of otherwise unemployable person wasting their productive life on wordcelling for fake prestige.
Absence of evidence is not evidence of absence. If you seek evidence you must put good faith efforts in finding the evidence or evidence of absence before asking others to waste time nullifying your claims for which you have produced no evidence.
> India State of Forest Reports (ISFR)
Published every 2 years shows strong growth in India's forests. Though their methodology, methods of calculation have been questions the general trend of forestation is not questioned by anyone.
Indian government has had many programs for forestation. I am not familiar with all regions but I am specifically aware of western Ghats in India. These very ghats were once nearly destroyed by "experts" writing in "peer reviewed" journals who introduced non-native fast growth trees in the region as replacement for native trees. These trees such as Acacia etc. were very detrimental for local wildlife and rest of the ecosystem.
While I am skeptical of government initiatives in general, they have worked for India's western ghats pretty well mostly due to urbanization. These initiatives pay local communities and farmers to grow and plant trees. A lot of scams happen and money gets stolen. Survival rate of trees remains at 30% instead of expected 60%. Trees planted are often of only 3-4 varieties and sometimes non-native but all things considered it works out positively.
Meh! Practical result matters not papers. Everything done in paper. What I've seen in India is trees are planted with publicity, photos, but are not take care of and dies, another program starts and plants thousands of trees, dies within a year, circle goes round. Otherhand seeing many hills destroyed for construction needs.
The number of planted tree grows but benefit not seen, except for the group doing it. People are too into feelings, by seeing the headlines they need to feel good that's why so much publicity is needed, so many banners everywhere, ads in news-paper spending billions by gov.
Do not get influenced by the English media that loves the stories of anecdotal heroes. On one hand nothing in India is done in an organized way. But the forestation and wildlife management is done relatively better than other things.
Environmentalists and bureaucrats are epitome of evil in India. Where I lived in India, the forest officials themselves hunted the wild game and gifted it to environmentalists and vice versa. Need exotic meat to eat ? The forest officer or the local wildlife activist is the guy who can make it happen. Want to eat Olive Ridley Turtle eggs ? The officer incharge of their conservation can sell it to you.
India's forests, rivers, beaches have been inhabited by their native people for thousands of years. Over years they did figure out what works and what does not. For example ban on fishing during breeding season was a traditional system. Not hunting in "God's forest" was essentially a wildlife preserve. Religion, way of life and sustainability was part of the society in an organic way. Need to build a checkdam seasonally ? we had a local process for that. The dam was built on new moon day of X month and taken down with the first rain etc.
I am not romantacizing the poor people's life in India. Their systems had problems. Unscrupulous people took advantage of religious beliefs, some systems were based on exploitation etc. etc. But with growth in population and urbanization required a seamless transition of these traditional systems into governance structures of local bodies.
That did not happen because of Indian Government. They adopted the British I*S system and airdropped young and corrupt idiots as the overlords of the areas. Activists who wrote papers in "peer reviewed" journals then wrote reports on how these babus gotta civilize the villagers and put in new system in place.
Once you ban hunting entirely, the hunters go back to their life and poachers take over. Hunters understand concept of wild life preserves. Poachers don't. Hunters now out of business don't have incentive to stop poaching. Before you know it the poachers and babus have formed a nexus to sell game meat.
Same goes for trees. Government banks cutting down trees entirely as if it is murder. Entire wood logging industry is killed off under the sheer weight of red tape. Since I come from wood logging family, the red tape meant we could not sell our trees profitably anymore. I had to look for altnerative occupation for myself and sell the land to wood mafia who now use the land for a "pretend forest" while they actually steal wood from national parks and public lands.
One nice thing about these developing countries is due to the power infrastructure tends to be not very good - which prompts people to take things into their hands and install solar, not to save the planet but to stave off brownouts, and be able to run the AC around the clock to stave off the heat.
For residential, solar + batteries straight up beats legacy infra on cost, and with the upcoming cheap sodium batteries, things are only going to get better.
In fact mobile infrastructure in general kind of leapfrogged land lines in many developing nations. Why run tens of thousands of kilometres of land lines when you could just dot self-sufficient wireless comms towers around the place?
Cities tend to expand up. Almost all buildings in Mumbai that are under 5 stories are targeted for "redevelopment" i.e. a developer buying it out and building something taller in its place.
But I live in a rural area of New Zealand and I also see how people moving onto farm land greatly increases tree cover (not forrest) and biodiversity, I assume because people plant gardens, and closely husband them
In New Zealand farmers are grossly damaging to the environment. They clear everything and plant mono cultures and treat water as exhaustable and rivers as waste dumps
So yes people in cities is a good thing, but people in rural areas are good, to
Guess it depends on whether subsistence living is more resource intensive than urban living where on average urbanites own more possessions per capita.
This is opposite to everything I've ever read. A brief "greening" period was expected (and is now nearing its end) as climate change started taking off due specifically to this effect.
Edit: to clarify, I'm saying the greening thing already happened due to increases in CO2 levels (though it's possible this is due to heat and not CO2 itself, I guess?).
Hmmm, separately of plant-types, I wonder if there may be a distinction here between how a surge in individual growth doesn't necessarily translate to a surge in the forest.
Imagine a higher CO2 concentration allows a tree to reach maturity a whole +25% faster, taking 16y instead of 20y. However its happening in an established forest, already bounded by mountains, rivers, etc, where mature trees sustain for another 100y before they finally die off and take 10y to decompose, opening the spot for a replacement.
In that case, the number of simultaneous trees doesn't go up very much, because the main effect is to reduce "downtime". The "duty-cycle" for a tree-sized patch of ground goes from having a mature tree ~77% of the time to ~79%.
Interesting theory. I imagine there would be a stratification of mature and immature trees that would be pretty striking if this is the case. It might not be hard to find out if it's true!
So, it turns out that there are two types of plants: those whose growth is rate-limited by available CO2, and those whose aren't, as the latter evolved a more efficient pathway during a previous era of low CO2 concentrations.
So depending on which kinds of plants, you can both be right.
Climate patterns are changing. My kids will retire with the cheap old farmland we bought that I’m planting black walnuts on.
Upstate NY was ideal maple syrup production territory for years. Now, we’ve changed from USDA Zone 5 to 6, so the region will be more like western Virginia in 20 years.
The TLDR is that they aren't. Global warming made some areas more hospitable to forests (warmer, more precipitation) and increased drought resistance counteracts some of the increased aridity in other ares: https://e360.yale.edu/features/greening-drylands-carbon-diox...
The atmosphere has so far barely changed in temperature compared to natural variations in temperature over time that had smaller and lesser effects than the effect we are seeing.
The abnormally rapid rise in CO2 levels we are seeing is unusual and accords better with the unusualness of rapid global greening. It isn't climate change that is causing it. It is CO2, directly.
If you look at the absorption spectrum of CO2 and historical data, I think it would be more correct to say, that CO2 has caused a noticeable increase in temperature in the past, but now absorption has reached a saturation level. The last 100 years temperature effects might have been dominant, but in the future direct effects of CO2 are absolutely going to dominate.
Hopefully EVs are being purchased to replace existing ICE cars, in which case the falling price is a good thing since it makes them more available at lower price points. Replacing a car with one that is cheaper to run and produces less emissions is usually a good thing.
If people are buying (and storing, and fueling) EVs in addition to their collection of ICE cars, that's probably a separate issue about overconsumption.
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.