More dead billionaires, please.
this post was submitted on 23 Mar 2026
278 points (97.3% liked)
News
36714 readers
2261 users here now
Welcome to the News community!
Rules:
1. Be civil
Attack the argument, not the person. No racism/sexism/bigotry. Good faith argumentation only. This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban. Do not respond to rule-breaking content; report it and move on.
2. All posts should contain a source (url) that is as reliable and unbiased as possible and must only contain one link.
Obvious biased sources will be removed at the mods’ discretion. Supporting links can be added in comments or posted separately but not to the post body. Sources may be checked for reliability using Wikipedia, MBFC, AdFontes, GroundNews, etc.
3. No bots, spam or self-promotion.
Only approved bots, which follow the guidelines for bots set by the instance, are allowed.
4. Post titles should be the same as the article used as source. Clickbait titles may be removed.
Posts which titles don’t match the source may be removed. If the site changed their headline, we may ask you to update the post title. Clickbait titles use hyperbolic language and do not accurately describe the article content. When necessary, post titles may be edited, clearly marked with [brackets], but may never be used to editorialize or comment on the content.
5. Only recent news is allowed.
Posts must be news from the most recent 30 days.
6. All posts must be news articles.
No opinion pieces, Listicles, editorials, videos, blogs, press releases, or celebrity gossip will be allowed. All posts will be judged on a case-by-case basis. Mods may use discretion to pre-approve videos or press releases from highly credible sources that provide unique, newsworthy content not available or possible in another format.
7. No duplicate posts.
If an article has already been posted, it will be removed. Different articles reporting on the same subject are permitted. If the post that matches your post is very old, we refer you to rule 5.
8. Misinformation is prohibited.
Misinformation / propaganda is strictly prohibited. Any comment or post containing or linking to misinformation will be removed. If you feel that your post has been removed in error, credible sources must be provided.
9. No link shorteners or news aggregators.
All posts must link to original article sources. You may include archival links in the post description. News aggregators such as Yahoo, Google, Hacker News, etc. should be avoided in favor of the original source link. Newswire services such as AP, Reuters, or AFP, are frequently republished and may be shared from other credible sources.
10. Don't copy entire article in your post body
For copyright reasons, you are not allowed to copy an entire article into your post body. This is an instance wide rule, that is strictly enforced in this community.
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
especially one that donated to AIPAC.
I didn't know him, but apparently he financed the republicans. If that is indeed the case I say fuck this guy.
On the other hand the site took out the middleman/madam who traditionally exploited these women (perhaps man as well) So, good for them!
Edit: I'm an idiot, I'm sure the site took a fat percentage of the earnings, so technically they just replaced the pimps. And just like that my sympathy is gone...
I mean taking a cut is pimpish but at least they aren't getting beaten up and physically abused and getting STDs and whatnot.
It is a little better for them.
Thing is though legalized and well regulated full on prostitution would also be better than traditional pimps as well.
He certainly didn't become a billionaire by charging them reasonable fees for the financial and computational infrastructure his company provided.
EDIT: Example of what I mean by how much OF has ruined mainstream social media.
I went on Facebook earlier this eve. I saw a video from Bentellect show up on my reels, a content creator with 17M total followers across all his socials. About 60% of his videos are him reacting to people's online posts. The other 40% (the ones that the algorithms are actually promoting) are ones of him and his girlfriend in their underwear picking outfits out for each other and doing some silly fake catwalk poses on a treadmill. And of course, each of these videos begins with her strutting past the camera, full view of her huge panty-clad arse.
Check profile, click link to Instagram, oh look, a LinkMe URL, which takes me to a profile where about 90% of the page is taken up by links to their separate OnlyFans pages, and about 5% of the page has a few puny buttons linking to Ben's Facebook, YouTube, TikTok, Instagram, Twitch and X pages. And of course most of her videos are pay-to-view with some requring as much as a $100 tip.
This seems to be something he's done ever since he started dating an ex-pornstar, which I assume was rather recently based on his post history.
I'm not exactly mourning this guy's death. Not only because of his financial support for the US Republicans, but because OnlyFans has single-handedly ruined the online pornography and greater social media landscape.
You can't go on Facebook, Instagram, Threads, Tumblr, X, any dating app, or even Reddit anymore without seeing how much e-girls have astroturfed and spammed the absolute shit out of these platforms. And the way they get past content guidelines (which should've had them banhammered outside of Reddit) is with an allmylinks or linktree URL in their bio where half the links are trying to lull you into paying $20/month to see their nudes. Then you have models like Bonnie Blue who have genuinely gained infamy from doing it with over a thousand guys in a single day, in the kind of publicity stunt that has shown just how low the bar has fallen.
Amateur porn used to be about exhibitionism. Now it's all shot with professional grade studio setups and you don't get any kind of interaction or engagement unless you bankroll a model's influencer lifestyle. We've genuinely commodified female interaction as a society and made bank off of findom. That I think is more damaging to society than the lack of ID & age verification checks on porn sites, and why I think the Dead Internet Theory held a lot of weight years before the rise and wide adoption of generative AI...
On top of that, it's simply poor value for money. We rag on the television and film industries for the amount of competing streaming platforms they've created which have all-but-reversed the money consumers saved on cable packages, yet we simultaneously celebrate OF and its ability to let you subscribe to a single creator for twice the price as a Netflix-of-porn streaming service like Pornhub Premium or Xvideos Red. And it's not as if porn isn't freely available all over the internet...
he also funds AIPAC, so nobody shedding tears. OF puts the money back in the hands of the "OF" acct users. Porn industry, the studios control all the money, or have the ability blacklists actors they dont like.
Disagree. Some amateur porn was about exhibitionism but most of it was about money and that money was more often than not made by human slavers. I think onlyfans is a net good for this particular industry and the issues of "spam" and content moderation are entirely separate - it's the platforms that promote this spam as horny users are spending more time and money on the platform.
Counterpoint: there is plenty of poorly shot amateur porn that's free on pornhub. I've done some research.
they mostly been removed, and only "professional porn", non-PH sites have largely captured most of the old videos.
A lot of it has disappeared because PH removed all videos that weren't posted from verified accounts back in December 2020.
Yeah, xhamster is better than pornhub
dint xhamster captured most of the PH content before they sanitized it, plus some older OF content.
"Back in my days the women of porn were properly underpaid and fully exploited to do exactly what I wanted for way cheaper!"
I'm not mourning the death of a billionaire. And sure, the advertising of pornographic content could probably use a bit of regulation... Heck, that probably applies to advertising more broadly. But I'm not upset that sex workers today have alternatives to working with sketchy producers. I'd rather a #girlboss spam Facebook (which you shouldn't be using in 2026 anyways) than a GirlsDoPorn situation.
It's a bit more complicated than that. OnlyFans gives me findom or financial exploitation vibes.
I'd also say they don't exactly have a squeaky-clean reputation either. CEASE have raised concerns about young women being exploited by their audience. They've also come under fire for their leniency towards accounts that repeatedly post illegal content.
Do not get me wrong, I'm not defending the seedy practices of the porn industry, especially with all the crap that went down with GirlsDoPorn. But if I can't even meet with ladies on a dating app because I only see hordes of fake spam profiles marketing porn to me, then it's a sign that social media has been truly enshittified with content that doesn't even belong on a lot of these platforms.
When I refer to amateur stuff, I'm thinking more like the earlier days of Reddit's seedy side. The only NSFW sub that I think explicity bans OF models due to wanting to uphold that exhibitionist spirit is r/gonewild.
$11 million donation to AIPAC. The world has lost nothing of value with his passing.
apart from a business leader making sex work safer and more profitable for sex workers
I think this may have been an unintended benefit
Agreed. Imagine being so shitty I cheered for cancer…
Imagine reaching the pinnacle of wealth and achievement only to have this happen.
And all your money won’t another minute buy. Dust in the wind.
And all your money won’t another minute buy.
Because all these billionaires would rather hoard money than pay taxes for cancer research, or get Trump elected, who killed all cancer research in 2025.
We should have service that sends cards to people on their deathbeds: "No cure, but you saved $11,000 in taxes".
I have a feeling that many of them are not smarter than regular engineering department student
load more comments
(3 replies)
"long battle with cancer" should've been longer for him specifically
I don't wish cancer on anyone but I also kind of wish it on all the billionaires in the hope that they'd use their unfathomable amounts of wealth and power to "solve" this horrible disease.
Make a new Manhattan project of it. Get all the researchers together, throw money and resources on them until they find a cure for it. Fast!
And you imagine they'd just give the cure (whatever form that may be) away for free? That's not what billionairs are known for! Can you imagine the calamity that such power would cause? People getting a personalized quote for ~~curing~~ managing their cancer, which will definitely include an "affordable" monthly payment. There is an applicable recent Black Mirror episode giving you an idea of a similar scenario.
No, if there is ever such an endevour, I sincerly hope it will be funded by public money and there may no patents come forth of the research or cure.
I'd be all for it but I'm actually not sure how much the public would like to spend on this topic with lots of other things to take care of too.
Billionaires on the other hand just collect wealth and don't have to think about the public opinion. They could even market it as philanthropy.
I'm aware that they might want to keep a lid on it but that's still better than no cure at all.
Curing cancer would be the equivalent of the Manhattan project, the moon landing, the mapping of the human genome and the making it relatively affordabl, e the discovery of both antibiotics and phage therapy, and the development and mass deployment of vaccines. It is an achievement demonstrating such wild dominance over the struggles and complexity of the physical world that I think its only comparisons would be to something like establishment of terraformed nations on Mars.
Right now we're still developing cures for the easy cancers. Attempting to cure cancers is big business in both the pharmaceutical world and in nonprofits, and it is working, but it's slow. Unfortunately cancers are made of our own cells so even things like curing bacterial disease don't even really express the difficulty. But it's happening, and general treatments and prognoses continue to improve as well as increasing numbers of cures for specific cancers in people with certain gene presentations.
Sorry about the rant, my mom died of cancer nearly a decade ago and I'm annoyed to no end by people acting like big pharma is intentionally not curing cancer to make more money, when the reality is what I said above.
load more comments
(2 replies)
load more comments
(13 replies)
I’ll toss one off in his honor
But one of the first things I learned from the Internet in the 90s is that I will never ever have to pay for porn
Edit: ok, so I get that OnlyFans was more about the eSexWork part of the CumCalculus, but, still, not for me. No judgment, though. In fact, I had some friends that found it quite empowering.
It may sound weird, but the only person I follow on OnlyFans (and have paid for) is a friend of mine, someone I've hung out with in real life. She only did it because she was struggling to make enough money, even with a job!
It was a little weird, I guess, to see her boobs online and then go hang out at her house, but whatever.
Oh, also I guess I follow Markiplier who posted "tasteful nudes" and donated all the money to charity.
load more comments
(4 replies)
load more comments
(12 replies)
At risk of repeating myself (just saw this above)
Sweet, NEXT
So he didn't do any of the work for originally coming up with the idea or making the site, and then he also didn't do any of the work in making the site's popular content.
I do see there is some risk and some value in investing in a company, but it seems wrong that he became a billionaire when the people who did the actual work didn't. More evidence that we don't need billionaires.
load more comments
(10 replies)
view more: next ›