17 ms·
Iran starts Bitcoin-backed ship insurance for Hormuz strait
https://finance.yahoo.com/markets/crypto/articles/iran-starts-bitcoin-backed-shipping-122906039.html https://finance.yahoo.com/markets/crypto/articles/iran-start...
- jauntywundrkind 5mo ago[flagged]
- anukin 5mo agoHow do you ban this? It’s not part of swift or any us govt. backed global financial rails. If Iran(a sanctioned entity) supports this then this is more proof that the thing works.
- bigyabai 5mo ago> How do you ban this? In America? KYC would suffice.
- anukin 5mo agoAmerica is not the world. They can’t go and sanction companies operating out of China or Japan who want a safe passage through hormuz. Especially now that the military power that supports the sovereign guarantee of US dollar is under siege.
- deleted 5mo ago[deleted]
- smallerize 5mo ago> > Iran Starts Bitcoin-Backed Ship Insurance for Hormuz Strait > In America? No.
- LPisGood 5mo agoI’m not gonna comment on if it’s a good idea or not, but the US government could make it illegal for any financial institution that does business in America interacting with crypto. They could also make it illegal for any US financial institution to do business with any financial institution that interacts with crypto. They could probably also make it a crime to buy/sell crypto in America.
- sheikhnbake 5mo agoI wish I could pick the brain of banking finance expert on how feasible/realistic that could be after the cartel and FTO money laundering fiasco.
- bruce511 5mo agoThey could do all those things. But they won't. This administration is all-in on crypto, it's a key mechanism for receiving gift. They're not gonna cut it off. Its also trivial to turn your crypto into yuan and your yuan into $. So I'm not sure such a ban would be even remotely effective.
- furyofantares 5mo ago> They could do all those things. But they won't. This administration is all-in on crypto, it's a key mechanism for receiving gift. They're not gonna cut it off. This comment chain starts with "Maybe after the mobster losers in the white House finally get kicked out we can just ban this thing forever."
- bogota 5mo ago[dead]
- donkyrf 5mo agoChina already bans crypto. If America and Europe followed suit, the market for crypto would quickly collapse
- iamkrazy 5mo agoChina has banned crypto about a 100 times now.
- anukin 5mo agoHow do you ban bitcoin? It’s not hosted or supported by American financial rails or any entity like swift which can be influenced by the USA in any meaningful way.
- wrs 5mo agoIt's supported and influenced by the USA in the sense that if you can't ever turn it into dollars it becomes much less interesting.
- nuancebydefault 5mo agoAnything anyone wants to spend money on, can be converted into dollars. The currency has no tell in what it is used for.
- wrs 5mo agoThe hypothetical was that the US "bans" bitcoin, presumably meaning it becomes illegal for US financial institutions (or US-dependent ones, which is nearly all of them) to convert bitcoin to dollars. Somebody else might give you dollars for bitcoin, but then it becomes their problem. As the saying goes, "you can't eat bitcoin".
- LorenPechtel 5mo agoIt's not like the Dollar is the only worthwhile currency. Convert it into Euros. Or Yen. Or Yuan.
- nathan_compton 5mo agoYou could make it prohibitively problematic to use for most things.
- jauntywundrkind 5mo agoYou do what the the US is doing right now to starve Cuba & end civilization there: you embargo/sanction anyone doing business there. Like the Treasury/Dept of Commerce & others did with North Korean backed Tornado Cash. Some very quickly retrieved/not well researched (caveat reader) search links; https://home.treasury.gov/news/press-releases/jy0916 https://home.treasury.gov/news/press-releases/jy0916 https://www.paulhastings.com/insights/crypto-policy-tracker/a-whirlwind-of-change-the-delisting-of-tornado-cash https://www.paulhastings.com/insights/crypto-policy-tracker/...
- ck2 5mo agoKicked out? If the Dems don't win the Senate, nothing will change until maybe February 2029 but pretty sure the same people that gave him this power of insanity are just going to vote for the next nightmare, there's no lesson learned, not even with $5 gas and $6 diesel I don't even think a full blown recession would change anything And now they are bringing the warships back to Cuba so get ready for next distraction from this distraction from the other distraction while they crime-spree away
- selectodude 5mo agoYou and I and everybody else just handed $1 million to Jan 6th insurrectionists. Whatever is going to happen over the next 24 months is already in motion. All we can do now is prepare. And maybe get a little less squeamish.
- iamkrazy 5mo agoWith Alberta joining the US, forget about Dems getting the Senate for next 50 years.
- TacticalCoder 5mo ago> ... we can just ban this thing forever. I don't give a f--k about Bitcoin but I wouldn't want governments to start banning it. Because then why not ban VPN forever too? And require a digital ID for anyone going on to the Internet? And why not also mandate cameras operated by the state in every room of your apartment/house to make sure you behave? And backdoor in every cryptographic protocol. I mean why stop at banning Bitcoin komrade? BTW the EU is thinking about creating an EU-wide registry of every single asset owned by every single EU citizen, down to every gold coin (oh btw maybe we should ban individuals owning gold coins too?), every jewel, every painting, sculpture, old car, watch, pokemand and Magic the Gathering card: they literally have a plan to make an inventory of every single asset. When asked, by a member of the EU parliament I think, if they could promise this would never be used as a basis for confiscation the EU Commission answered they couldn't promise that. Where do you draw the line? Is there one point at which you start saying that freedom shouldn't be taken away?
- thelastgallon 5mo ago> EU-wide registry of every single asset owned by every single EU citizen The best place to start this would be with the offshore tax havens.
- deleted 5mo ago[deleted]
- konschubert 5mo ago“Insurance”
- srean 5mo agoBitcoin does make the transaction publicly traceable. Either they have not realised that, seems unlikely, or they prefer it that way.
- misja111 5mo agoIt's not about traceability, it's about not having to use the dollar as currency.
- Waterluvian 5mo agoI don’t know stuff but I feel I’ve learned that the Americans can make basic commerce unbelievably painful for whoever they choose through sanctions and disconnection from various financial systems.
- srean 5mo agoThat's significant messaging though -- we don't have anything to hide, down with the dollar. I have read many comments that the regime wants to money launder the inflow. Bitcoin would be rather inconvenient for that.
- tboyd47 5mo agoWhat difference does it make?
- trunkiedozer 5mo ago[dead]
- everdrive 5mo agoMuch of the post-WW2 American-led world order was founded partially on the United States using its military to keep international waters open. It would be quite stunning Iran defeated the united states in this sense. The military might is there, but this administration clearly had no idea what they were getting themselves into and did not plan accordingly. (and does not have the will or public support to do so) The baffling part of this is that nearly everyone was aware that Iran could close the straight if pressed hard enough. The fact that this outcome is surprising represents a very loud and public failure on the administration's part.
- deleted 5mo ago[deleted]
- rainbowzootsuit 5mo agoI would amend that to be that everyone thought Iran could close the straight, but now they _know_ they can close the straight.
- nerfbatplz 5mo agoIronically the US has never ratified UNCLOS. The American professed interest in maintaining right of passage does not appear to require them to be held to the same standards. Also the Strait of Hormuz is an international strait not international waters. The entire strait lies within Iranian and Omani waters. Frankly it's a bit absurd to complain that your ships can't transit a country's waters while you bomb them.
- sieabahlpark 5mo ago[dead]
- LorenPechtel 5mo agoThe original ship channel was in Omani waters, not Iranian. It is entirely unreasonable to consider it reasonable for Iran to mine Omani waters.
- 5mo ago
- mrandish 5mo agoI guess I'm just surprised they even bother trying to mask an obvious shake down under the euphemism "insurance" when it's such a trope. Obligatory Sopranos clip of old school mobsters trying to sell "protective insurance" to a Starbucks: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_Gsz7Gu6agA https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_Gsz7Gu6agA
- LorenPechtel 5mo agoIt lets people not look up. And given the slightest opportunity an awful lot of people will take the don't look up answer.
- gpm 5mo agoI assume it's to discredit the current international insurance scheme for shipping that doubles as a method of enforcing sanctions.
- bradley13 5mo agoIran could easily have garnered a lot of international sympathy and support. Instead, they attacked their neighbors, impacted the world economy, and now are basically asking for blackmail money: "nice ship you have there...". Maybe Trump should bomb them some more?
- HappyPanacea 5mo agoIran knows hard currency is better than soft power
- statguy 5mo ago[flagged]
- srean 5mo agoSympathy gets you Gaza, West Bank and a few refugee camps. Geopolitics understands one language alone.
- Jensson 5mo agoAnd what has this done to help Iran so far? Trump doesn't care about peoples opinions, US oil is making record profits thanks to the war so there wont be pushback from them, and Trump has 5 more months until midterms that is still plenty of time. The main thing it resulted in is the Europe led coalition that aims to ensure the strait will never get blocked again, so Iran can never play this card again, that will lose them a lot of political power in the future since this card is now gone.
- yxwvut 5mo agoMore of a "Bitcoin-Backed Protection Racket", presumably?
- genxy 5mo agoWe know they are just going to spend it all on polymarket.
- int32_64 5mo agoThere's no insurance scheme the IRGC can concoct that protects against the US navy hitting your rudder with a 20mm gun.
- bdangubic 5mo agoUS Navy has shown particular strength in this conflict against Iran, sitting in the international waters many (many, many) miles away and chillin :)
- Jensson 5mo agoWhats weak about doing the smart thing?
- nerfbatplz 5mo agoAmerican destroyers and aircraft carriers have been chased away from the Strait multiple times now. Hilariously the USS George HW Bush had to go the long way around Africa rather than risk transiting the Bab El Mandeb after the Houthis defeated the US Navy last year.
- Jensson 5mo agoIn what way were they chased away? Iran tried to sink them and didn't hit any shots, and many on Iran's side died trying. Many IRGC soldiers dying and not even scratching the paint on US vessels doesn't show US to be weak. > Hilariously the USS George HW Bush had to go the long way around Africa rather than risk transiting the Bab El Mandeb after the Houthis defeated the US Navy last year. Valuing the lives of your crewmen and avoid terrorists is bad how? USA not wanting their soldiers to die is weak? Would you want more deaths on US side to show strength? USA can win this war with barely any casualties, why would you not do that? And USA being able to do this with barely any losses shows tremendous strength to me, Iran was more powerful than Ukraine but USA could establish aerial superiority immediately with no losses, this is so much stronger than what Russia displayed.
- mempko 5mo agoI had fairly deep knowledge about the bitcoin code base 7 years ago and I got a weird vibe from it as I've seen government code before. When I learned that Tor was funded by the Navy something clicked. Just as it makes sense to have a large onion network to allow spies abroad to surf the web anonymously, it would make sense to also have a currency you can use to fund agents or groups abroad that lived outside the banking system. Bitcoin makes sense for that purpose. If you have a large border-less digital currency with many people on it, even if it is traceable, it's still less risky then using cash which you would have to launder. The fact that many states are now using it for funding purposes to get around the banking system further adds proof to bitcoin's potential origin. Also, it doesn't help that Satoshi Nakamoto means basically central intelligence in Japanese... I'm not saying Bitcoin was created by the government, but if it was there are signs...
- tehjoker 5mo agoIt's a lot easier to carry bitcoins than suitcases full of foreign cash or gold bars too. In China, they moved to digital currencies in part I believe to defeat CIA bags of cash (no point in getting stacks of paper money you can't use...). However, censorship resistant digital currencies allow them to continue their sneaky tricks. This kind of thing explains in part why despite being an obvious scam, the government allowed cryptocurrencies to grow so large that eventually they formed their own feedback loop so strong that crypto bros were the biggest funders the 2024 presidential campaigns.
- deleted 5mo ago[deleted]
- Cider9986 5mo agohttps://archive.ph/r8TuZ https://archive.ph/r8TuZ Corrupted but there's more I guess.
- tomhow 5mo agoSyndicated here: https://finance.yahoo.com/markets/crypto/articles/iran-starts-bitcoin-backed-shipping-122906039.html https://finance.yahoo.com/markets/crypto/articles/iran-start...
- stormking 5mo ago[flagged]
- colordrops 5mo agoIs the US or Israel asking for blockchain payments for access? "terror state". I would have hoped that HN users would be smarter than to parrot FOX news propaganda.
- isr 5mo agoI echo your sentiments. Much of the 'Murika 'Murika bluster even on this thread is so childishly unreal (as if from a MAGA wet dream parallel universe) that it almost doesn't rankle anymore. One feels that even they don't believe their own propaganda anymore, and are still shouting it to somehow "will" it into existence ...
- 948382828528 5mo ago[dead]
- CommanderData 5mo agoTerror state, for them doesn't include genocidal colonialist invaders like Israel. These descriptions are from objective scholars including Jewish ones btw.
- LorenPechtel 5mo ago[flagged]
- CommanderData 5mo agoIsrael has killed many in Iran during the recent war, hasbara trolls hang out on forums to tell people otherwise. It doesn't care in the slightest for Iranians and wish utter turmoil in the country, we have seen it's treatment to Arabs clear as day in Gaza and the West Bank.
- deleted 5mo ago[deleted]
- LeFantome 5mo agoThis global tax will be Trump’s legacy. It will be what the world knows him for generations after he is gone.
- sureglymop 5mo agoMy first thought: what mining power does Iran have? Seems important.
- tmnvix 5mo agoIt's worth remembering that the Iranians have as yet never claimed that the strait is mined. They have said that it may be. A lot of reporting misses this and assumes (perhaps deliberately) that the presence of mines is a fact. But of course Iran doesn't need mines to enforce the blockade. They have drones and missiles that can be operated safely from 100's of kilometres away. They have anti-ship sea-skimming missiles. Not to mention the very large fleet of small armed fastboats.
- martinohansen 5mo agoI think the question is about bitcoin mining power and now actual mines
- tmnvix 5mo agoHa! You would be right. My mistake.
- daft_pink 5mo agoI’m not convinced that bitcoin is stable enough to use in insurance products. The currency volatility risk is too high to reasonably cover the covered losses which will need to be covered in some other currency to do things like replace boats etc.
- asdff 5mo agoThe volatility is only an issue if you need to convert the bitcoin in the near future. If you are willing to wait, volatility goes in your advantage. Bitcoin is volatile enough that if you wait for maybe a few years you will probably hit a pump that will far exceed the growth of most other investments. You don't even need to sell at the high to do this, the run up is often plenty enough gain.
- tencentshill 5mo agoThey were charging 0BTC per ship before, so they come out ahead no matter the current value of the coin. They can change their fees by the day as well.
- cpncrunch 5mo agoThis isnt an insurance product though. Its “insurance”, aka extortion.
- ProllyInfamous 5mo ago...it's the same picture.
- daft_pink 5mo agoI see. I misunderstood
- jt2190 5mo agoNo, it’s actual insurance: > Iran has started a Bitcoin-backed insurance service for Iranian shipping companies that want to transit the Strait of Hormuz, the semi-official Fars news agency reported, citing documents obtained from the country’s Ministry of Economy and Financial Affairs. > According to a screen shot of the insurance company’s website, dubbed Hormuz Safe and shared by Fars news, it “provides Iranian shipping companies and cargo owners with fast, verifiable digital insurance.” Fars didn’t give a detailed break down of how the insurance works and whether it’s available to foreign shipping companies and vessels.
- bflesch 5mo agoIf they put a substantial portion of their wealth into bitcoin we might witness the ultimate rugpull when the BTC creators cash in their large share of previously untouched coins.
- bradley13 5mo agoNice ship you have there. Be a shame if something...happened to it.
- MASNeo 5mo agoWhy is everyone obsessed with US military when the news seems to be Bitcoin? Just like that the US Dollar suffered because clearly a crypto currency may well become what the US Dollar was, a commodity to exchange value in a way that nobody can reasonably refuse. Whether that is for better or worse, I think that is bigger news then whose got the bigger gun.
- deleted 5mo ago[deleted]
- bogota 5mo ago[dead]
- thijson 5mo agoIt is bigger news indeed. I think previously China and Saudi were settling their account deficit with gold, a big airplane load every now and then.
- ams92 5mo agoI think this is more due to the fact that the Iranian currency has completely collapsed.
- joe_the_user 5mo agoOne thing I'd wonder is whether using bitcoin actually involves real de-dollarization. Most stable coin is dollar based and other stable-coin don't seem like strong US competitors. China bans bitcoin trading so any Yuan/rmb based stable coin is marginal. So bitcoin seems strongly related to dollars.
- ninjagoo 5mo ago> Why is everyone obsessed with US military Shock of the unsavvy
- lern_too_spel 5mo agoThey are using Bitcoin exactly for what it's good at, which is to support sanctioned regimes against the interests of the West. We've seen Russia and North Korea siphon money from gullible Bitcoin promoters this way, and now Iran is getting in on the action.
- yieldcrv 5mo agocrypto insurance products have been very successful in the DeFi space for more than half a decade, a protocol you are using gets hacked and instead of whaling about it on hackernews the insurance policy you opened pays out immediately there is a lot of examples on how to design it, and it doesn't really seem like this Iranian one for shipping is designed well if its just an insurance pool in bitcoin at all times but if they are using the bitcoin blockchain to sign the insurance records of a policy and claim, and then the state administrator is acquiring bitcoin to pay out policies at time of claim, then that could work. that was one of the bullish cases theorized for bitcoin back in 2011, 2012, its a long list
- u1hcw9nx 5mo agoEven if Iran would charge $2 million per ship (like it has done) it would be manageable cost for for shipping companies and would generate same amount of income as Iran's domestic oil production. When the US violates the law of the sea in the South America, why not. Everybody complains but understands.
- tommica 5mo agoFew things: 1) no one owns the strait, Iran has never owned it, its international waters. 2) Who says they keep it at $2 million? Due to the location they could say anything and people would pay it, that would have a massive impact in worlds economy. And any plans to bypass the strait would get heavy attention from Iran and their friends - because no one wants to lose their cash cow. 3) if Iran is allowed to do that, everyone starts to do that - you think oil is expansive now? Good luck when every country with similar bottlenecks nearby starts their tolls. Again, these are international waters. As for the US breaking law of the sea in South America, I assume you mean blowing up boats? Has anyone proven that they have been civilians and that they have lied about the targets?
- stahtops 5mo agoDo you think you are American?
- tommica 5mo agoWhat does that have to do with anything?
- wickedwiesel 5mo agoDid you notice that you emphasize the rule of law in your argument 1) but let the rule of law walk the plank (and drown in the south sea so to speak) with your fourth statement?
- tommica 5mo agoFair point
- danbruc 5mo agoThe US should be happy about this. Maybe. Iran seeking reparations is a reasonable demand, this gives the US a way to satisfy a demand without having to pay themselves - which certainly would not be popular, to say the least - making an exit easier. There is of course the risk of setting an undesirable precedent and it is not clear what the consequences of that would be.
- daymanstep 5mo agoThe US allowing Iran to levy a toll on Hormuz would completely discredit the US and set the precedent for other countries to levy their own shipping tolls . It's a non-starter.
- sharts 5mo agoEvery country has that right though.
- iwontberude 5mo agoIf anything we hand them tons of cash near 0% to rebuild and they join the Eurodollar cartel pushing our hegemony further. Politicians would need to do a better job explaining deficit spending and Keynesianism more generally.
- chrisco255 5mo agoIran has been funding terrorists for decades and the IRGC has murdered tens of thousands of Iranians. There are no reparations for terrorists getting their comeuppance.
- toasty228 5mo ago> Iran has been funding terrorists for decades Americans not understanding that half of the world says the same thing about them is the funniest shit ever... Propaganda is one hell of a drug
- HDThoreaun 5mo ago
- elzbardico 5mo agoLet’s be frank. Iran could have built at least crude gun type fission bombs since they reached industrial scale for enrichment. And this being very dismissing of Iranian scientific and technological capabilities. Given modern computer consumer hardware, I don’t see why they couldn’t even have built implosion lens based fission devices without testing. DPRK would probably provide them with all the data they needed for the simulations. Iran has been a few weeks from having a few bombs for the last 30 years because they decided not to build it.
- tmnvix 5mo agoExactly. Which, when you think about it, shows that the 'Iran cannot have a nuclear bomb' argument for this war is not exactly the true motivation (not to say that the US and Israel really don't want them to have a bomb). This war is about trashing Iran. Adding it to the string of other failed states in the area. It would be more honest for Trump and Netanyahu to say that the motivation for this war is to ensure that Iran becomes a state that is incapable of developing the bomb (i.e. a failed and fractured, or weak and compliant).
- elzbardico 5mo agoYes, the war is about Israel extreme far right removing an obstacle for their crazy expansionist ideas and about keeping America hegemonic power in the region.
- throw310822 5mo agoBesides, nuclear weapons are- if usable at all- a defensive weapon. The claim that Iran would attack Israel with nuclear weapons is primarily meant to suggest that they're crazy fanatics blinded by such a hatred that they would be happy to destroy themselves together with their enemy. On the other hand, I'm not exactly sure why Iran doesn't give up all its nuclear capabilities. It would cost them nothing except pride, and would remove any excuse from the table for the US and Israel for their aggression and sanctions.
- DarkUranium 5mo ago
- flowerthoughts 5mo agoIf this was open to non-Iranian shipping companies, it would be some Trump-level trolling. The aggressor that starts threatening tankers becomes the protector mobster, using non-USD as a middle finger. The US/Israel can't really start shooting at tankers without becoming the villain no one can accept. They're already low on trust capital everywhere. So the few payouts for normal claims would be dwarfed by the war insurance premium currently being charged. They could even offer a discount to loyal clients and still have insane margins. Yeah, I don't see how the US is coming out ahead in this conflict. Israel might have won some against their adversaries, setting them back a while or two.
- SubiculumCode 5mo ago[flagged]
- mattmaroon 5mo agoGeography prevents most people from exerting the form of control Iran has. It would be much more difficult for, say, Canada to control it. The Iranian coastline is pretty favorable. Also, most governments are more susceptible to being bombed than Iran. They’ve been preparing for it for decades. If nearly any country (except for maybe a couple of Irans neighbors) tried, they’d be easily routed.
- dzhiurgis 5mo agoIran is getting a lot of help from Oman, so perhaps thats a place to start.
- ElProlactin 5mo agoWhat do you mean by "so that's a place to start"? Oman is known as the "Switzerland of the Mideast" and has served as a trusted mediator in the region for a long time. Ostensibly, the Omanis have advised the US about the perils of attacking Iran, which is why no president before the current one was stupid enough to do it. The US is the second largest foreign investor in Oman, and Oman is one of just 14 countries the US has a Free Trade Agreement with. US citizens can own a business in Oman 100% without a local partner.
- mattmaroon 5mo agoOman is not helping them, they are merely being granted tolls by Iran because the strait is shared. Iran has launched several attacks on Oman.
- deleted 5mo ago[deleted]
- Karrot_Kream 5mo agoYes. The US is already increasing exports from the Gulf and UAE broke with OPEC to increase the throughput of Fujairah. If Gulf countries start exporting through Fujairah or other ports, it's eventually game over for Iran.
- nelox 5mo agoOne man’s insurance premium, is another man’s blackmail fee.
- elevation 5mo agoYou're the US and you're planning a 51% attack in a few weeks which will reverse NK and Iranian fortunes and claim the BTC of anyone who helped them. Any other objectives?
- milkytron 5mo agoI've actually wondered how many datacenters it would take to effectively perform a 51% attack on bitcoin. It seems like most newly built computing resources are at the disposal of a few companies and a few people...
- lordchair 5mo agoA 51% attack doesn't allow you to steal other people's coins, nor does it let you easily alter deep historical transactions. To rewrite the past, an attacker would have to continuously outpace the rest of the network to rebuild the chain from that exact point forward. The primary threat of a 51% attack is that the attacker could double spend their own coins or censor or block specific transactions.
- gib444 5mo agoAre we just going to have yearly events now pushing up the cost of everything, in perpetuity? I feel like the billionaires got a bit addicted to post-COVID highs
- oytis 5mo ago"Insurance"
- pinkmuffinere 5mo agoIsn't this bad for bitcoin? I expect the US will immediately say "No don't pay that" and start prosecuting people that pay via bitcoin, because of course it's traceable. Am I missing something?
- Pxtl 5mo agoHow is this a change from status quo? Bitcoin has been the currency of crime since soon after its inception. Back when you could mine on a CPU it was the way to monetize stolen compute. It was the way to buy illegal things on the now-pardoned silk road. It was the way to pay off ransomware. It is now the currency of dark influence money. Using it to pay off a shipping protection racket is prettymuch par for the course.
- pinkmuffinere 5mo agoI think it's different because of the message it sends. Using bitcoin to do generic illegal things is an 'offense' to anyone that wants to stop illegal things. But there's already lots of targets to aim for if somebody wants to enforce the law, the method of payment is kindof a small deal. However, in this case using bitcoin is an offense to the other party in the war -- the US. I think the US has a more obvious target, and is more capable to do something about the "problem" than general law-loving-folk are about illegal activity. At the very least, I'd think it breaks the embargo? And the US really has (historically) cared about that.
- ninjagoo 5mo ago> Bitcoin has been the currency of crime Like, say, cash, or check, or wires, or any other payment mechanism?
- iugtmkbdfil834 5mo agoNow.. and I am speaking just from the perspective of trying to achieve specific goals ( and accepting a level of pain for what those goals can demand ), if there was ever a possibility that US may ban/fully sanction bitcoin use, this actually might be it.
- skissane 5mo agoThey don’t need to ban bitcoin use - they just declare paying “insurance” or “tolls” to the Iranian government to be a sanctions violation, irrespective of the means of payment. Then this becomes a complete non-starter for any US company, and any non-US company in nations where the US has significant influence (i.e. most of the West)
- iugtmkbdfil834 5mo agoI get where you are coming from, but that assumes .. the old world order. Not to search very far, China told its refineries only last week to ignore those particular sets of US sanctions ( and more importantly, we did not hear anything about it since Trump's visit to China ).
- golem14 5mo agoThat seems like a smart move, given how much the Trump Dynasty seems to be enmeshed in the Bitcoin ecosystem. [Hearsay, I don't actually know more than what has been reported in the news ...]
- mattmaroon 5mo agoCrypto but not Bitcoin.
- ninjagoo 5mo agoThis is quite the, ahem, coup, for Bitcoin. I suppose it was inevitable in a fractured world. This will likely delay, or perhaps even block Pax-Sinica from taking shape. It's quite the achievement, that the inventor(s) of Bitcoin have continued to stay anonymous to this day.
- daxfohl 5mo agoNo need for insurance. Just start a prediction market, wait for an insider to play their cards, and traverse or not based on that.
- sph 5mo agoThis is good for Bitcoin.
- NotAFurry2 5mo ago[dead]
- aicivilization 5mo agonasıl bunu yapabilirler nasıl
- 1vuio0pswjnm7 5mo agoBloggers promoting cryptocurrency are calling this a "landmark moment" for Bitcoin https://www.msn.com/en-us/money/markets/a-landmark-moment-for-crypto-as-iran-demands-bitcoin-payment-from-oil-tankers-crossing-the-strait-of-hormuz/ar-AA20wRuK/ https://www.msn.com/en-us/money/markets/a-landmark-moment-fo... https://assets.msn.com/content/view/v2/Detail/en-in/AA20wRuK/ https://assets.msn.com/content/view/v2/Detail/en-in/AA20wRuK...
- simianparrot 5mo agoThis is a good thing, then we can trace exactly who paid for it, and fine them.