OnlyFans, as often happens with great ideas, was born with a very clear and positive goal in mind: empower content creators from all over the world to build a fan-base and entertain their admirers in a settled up environment.

Initially perceived as a homemade platform for sexual entertainment, has turned into a multi-billion dollar business. Since then certain implications have begun to surface that hint at a less savory side of this industry powerhouse.

It's known fact that the 1% of Onlyfans creators generate the same earnings as the resting 99%. Just to give an idea, the top Onlyfans creators are able to generate terrific earnings: Iggy Azalea claims to be able to earn 307.000 $ in A SINGLE DAY. Here you can find details about other high-net-worth creators.

The top one percent of OnlyFans creators, admired and lusted after by millions, has demonstrated an unrivaled ability to engage, chat, and entertain their vast user base. But here comes the elephant in the room: how feasible is it for these creators to handle such a magnitude of interaction? The answer is simple - they can't.

Truth is that Creators just physically lack the capacity to engage with all their fans simultaneously and that's where the outsourcing enters the picture. As a natural consequence, the suspect that these creators employ external agencies or workers rises up. According to a research most of the fans who pay for interacting with their favourite starlets actually engages with professional sexters, engaged with the precise goal of impersoning the creator and help him or her to entertain a broader audience and boost up their earnings.

If we look at the numbers and we try to do some simple math it appears quite obvious that something looks weird: considering the example above 307.000 $ a day, assuming an 8-hours working day would mean a striking 38.375$ per hour. Of course the number takes into account the active subscriptions, that do not require additional work for the creator, but yet the numbers do not add up. With a monthly subscription worth 25$ a month (that corresponds to roughly 0.83$ per day) would mean an active subscriber base of nearly 370.000 people which is quite high. Those numbers are actually mind blowing and it is hard to believe that a single person would be capable to maintain such an audience engaged (just try to figure our their inbox).

Basically that is made possible by a virtual army of employees, tasked with the daunting challenge of entertaining and engaging with unaware users in an unspoken yet widely adopted practice.

Probably working long hours, for minimum wage, shadow chatters are the hidden cogs that keep the OnlyFans machine running. While creators sit comfortably atop their content empire, these unsung heroes engage, flirt, sext and entertain on their behalf, all the while hidden behind a digital curtain.

As further proof Fanvue introduced an AI technology tool that helps creators managing their users so thay they're not required to hire external agencies any-more. This is one of the clearest proofs of this phaenomenon which I identify with the acronimon "FSR", Fake Synthetic Reality.

As for the users, they deserve better. They deserve transparency, respect, and the right to know who they're really interacting with. The veil of anonymity that OnlyFans hides behind needs to be lifted. Users are not just consumers to be exploited for financial gain; they're people seeking connections.

OnlyFans users are entitled to know who they're truly interacting with. From a consumer rights perspective, it's a matter of transparency and honesty. The need for change is evident, whether it's a reduction in subscription costs in light of this revelation or the creation of more informed consumer guidelines.

The role of top OnlyFans creators has gradually diminished to pure content creation, often devoid of personal interaction. It begs the question, do these creators genuinely care about their audience, or has the lure of easy money corrupted the platform's original intent? Am I really entiled to pay an extra value for a synthetic content whereas I can have the same value delivered for a fraction of the cost?

Diving deeper, we find a worrying trend - the dehumanization of the creators themselves. Stripped of their responsibility to interact with fans, they're reduced to just producing content. The process is akin to an assembly line, churning out impersonal content, devoid of real human touch and re-sold thousand of times.

The outsourcing agencies themselves often operate in anonymity and with little regard for the values of the original platform. This hidden workforce, working tirelessly in the shadows, is often exploited, underpaid, and overworked. The irony is palpable - a platform built to empower content creators is indirectly fueling a cycle of exploitation.

This lack of connection harms the users at the very end, who are left interacting with faceless agencies and induced to buy valueless content. Creators isolated from their fans, they risk losing the very human connections that make OnlyFans unique, this turn affected the entire way this schema creates value for users.

The advent of AI has further complicated this narrative. Now, with the potential to generate infinite content without the need for human intervention, the platform is in danger of becoming a hollow, synthetic mockery of its former self. It's high time users must be made aware of the potential falsehoods behind the OnlyFans original intent.

This business model's ethical implications are significant. The outsourcing of interactions and the use of AI-generated content undermine the authenticity OnlyFans initially promised. It's essential that this issue is acknowledged and addressed, placing user rights at the forefront of any future business decisions.

In a landscape where authentic human interactions are compromised, a new phenomenon is on the rise, the virtual influencers.

The extraordinary results of some of them highlight an astonighing truth. You don't have to actually exist to bring value to users and make them happy.

The attractiveness for users depends on how much entertainment and engagement you're able to provide, it does not matter if you are real or not. People value content regardless of whether it is fictional or not, the power of fantasy is once again confirmed. This seems true even in a world as typically tied to the tangible as that of influencers.

In this case, the content is fully AI-generated, the entertainment is AI-generated and there is no risk of conflict of interest or lack of transparency in the regard of users.

Moreover, the use of AI, while innovative. Sophisticated algorithms can now mimic human responses so well that it's becoming increasingly hard to differentiate between real and AI-generated content. This technology's implications are vast and varied, from the creation of 'deepfake' porn to the potential creation of virtual personalities. Did the content creator really put effort in the content I'm buying or is it AI generated content?

Is it better to entertain myself with a fake human and pay an extra for a fake-genuine interaction or directly entertain myself with AI? The answer to this question seems to be the latter.

All online platforms that monetize human interaction need to rethink their approach. Adopting more ethical, transparent practices must be prioritized so that users and creators alike can trust what they're investing their time and money into. Technological advancement, while remarkable, should never replace authenticity. The line between AI-generated content and real human interaction gets thinner everyday, and the use of such technology should always be disclosed.

The OnlyFans phenomenon has sparked a conversation that extends beyond its platform. It stands as a stark reminder of the ethical implications of technological advancements and the commodification of human interaction.

In conclusion, it's essential for users to be aware of these practices and for regulations to be put in place to protect both creators and consumers. The future of OnlyFans, and indeed similar platforms, relies on striking a balance between maintaining authenticity and embracing innovation.

Link to the Linkedin Version