> Porn is a machine that turns drug addicts into money.

Consider this[1]: "Belle Delphine is a hugely successful OnlyFans model making $1.2 million a month."

[1] https://www.insider.com/belle-delphine-net-worth-onlyfans-dr...

Yes, a single counterexample negates the general trend.

I have a friend who is gay and some 15 years ago when online webcams were starting had earned enough to buy a flat and a car with this, within 1 or 2 years. Nothing hardcore. It was mostly from tips. Wouldn't be possible to earn that much now, not for same things.

I guess sudden relative wealth isn't something many of these can handle properly and start doing stupid things.

I read that as per year at first. Per. Month. Wow.

Certainly not fortune, but fame, adoration, good living, future without actual work. Rich husband, influencer career, etc. Drug addicts dont last in porn.

Dakota Skye lasted quiet a long time until she OD'd.

https://www.rollingstone.com/culture/culture-features/porn-s...

> Drug addicts dont last in porn.

The producers know. And swap them out. As long there is somebody else, who can be abused by the same promises.

>future without actual work

Did you read TFA that goes in explicit details of the amount of actual work involved in porn?

You simply misunderstood me. Porn is treated by many performers as a gateway to larger things. Getting noticed, gaining notoriety, scoring rich husbands (footballer, Harvard professor), building "my after pron" careers like Lana.

Free porn online is marketing for high priced prostitution.

If you have lots of money, you can have sex with pornstars for money.

Probably parent doesn't consider sex work as "actual work", which is stupid. Sex work is probably the oldest form of "actual work" since modern civilization or even older.

> Porn is a machine that turns drug addicts into money. It's objectively bad as far as I'm concerned.

Here's an idea - regulate the porn industry so that anyone failing a drug test is cannot work in it, make the tests mandatory.

What we need is a war on drugs. We'll totally win that and there won't be drugs anymore.

> What we need is a war on drugs. We'll totally win that and there won't be drugs anymore.

I did not express an opinion on the legalisation (or not) of any drug at all.

My point is that if performers are performing only due to promise of getting their next fix, then regulating the industry and preventing them from getting hired at all in porn is a good solution. After all, what are the alternatives?

Lots of industries have regulations on drug use (once again, it's irrelevant whether the drug in question is legal or not); why not add the porn industry to that list?

Maybe we can change the game-theoretic parameters of the universe to disincentivize short-term outcome optimisation.