Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Iran demands Bitcoin fees for ships passing Hormuz during ceasefire

ft.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

221–230 of 300 posts

Re: Iran demands Bitcoin fees for ships passing Hormuz during ceasefire

#221

Post by overfeed »

kilgoresalmon wrote: post #198
cheriot wrote: post #195

Earlier quoted context omitted.

They've blown up several ships so which ship owner will test them? Spend $1m on a transit fee or risk $90m on a new tanker.

Is the US seriously going to side with Iran on a missing payment? Assuming not, is the value of the ceasefire more than $1m for Iran if a ship slyly doesn't pay or the few million if one starts a trend? As I said I might be cynical but I see layered games of chicken where some people are surprisingly risk tolerant..

Iran's terms are all ships transiting the strait have to coordinate with its military. One would assume they are monitoring ship movements, and know which ones are complying and which ones are not.

The US doesn't need to "side with Iran" on anything: ship captains, owners and insurers are free to gamble their ships and payloads against Iran's resolve and strike capabilities, my assumption is they like to predictability make money, and not losing customer's billion-dollar payloads is part of that.

Having your ship blown up won't guarantee the US will consider the ceasefire violated, history is littered with post-armistice engagements and deaths.

Re: Iran demands Bitcoin fees for ships passing Hormuz during ceasefire

#222

Post by throw310822 »

ReflectedImage wrote: post #202
throw310822 wrote: post #180

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I can't understand how it is possible that when such ceasefires are agreed there isn't a designated third party who has the signatures of both parties and can say, and prove, if it's been violated.

There is a designated third party Pakistan and they say Lebanon is part of the ceasefire.

They say it, but can they prove it? Because everyone seems to be saying a different thing. Shouldn't Pakistan be able to say "this is the document, these are the terms, these are the signatures, case closed"?

Re: Iran demands Bitcoin fees for ships passing Hormuz during ceasefire

#223

Post by triceratops »

stronglikedan wrote: post #145
deweller wrote: post #120

A "few seconds" to pay in bitcoin? So the captain is supposed to be watching for a response via email with his finger hovering over the pay button? Is the recipient address static? Surely they would use unique payment addresses if they have any hope of obfuscating payments. This all sounds more like a TV show script than an actual thought-out plan to me.

> So the captain is supposed to be watching for a response via email with his finger hovering over the pay button? no, mate

Is that a friendly response to the question, or are you saying it's actually the captain's second-in-command who watches the email?

Re: Iran demands Bitcoin fees for ships passing Hormuz during ceasefire

#224

Post by ndiddy »

wodenokoto wrote: post #42
belorn wrote: post #39

Does this mean ceasefire is now broken? The 10 point plan was to be discussed later in the peace talks, but what was the exact conditions that predicated the ceasefire?

Isn't it broken with Israel continuing their war against Lebanon?

The ceasefire agreement was mediated by Shehbaz Sharif, the prime minister of Pakistan. He announced yesterday that the US and Iran had agreed to a ceasefire everywhere, including Lebanon. They agreed to base negotiations on Iran's 10-point proposal. [1] Trump released his own statement that the US was agreeing to the ceasefire, again using Iran's 10-point proposal as a basis. [2] Benjamin Netanyahu announced that Israel would comply with the ceasefire. [3] Hours later, Israel carried out a brutal strike on dense commercial and residential areas in Southern Lebanon without warning, killing at least 254 people and injuring more than 1,000 others. [4] The IRGC announced that if Trump didn't rein in Israel, Iran would exit the ceasefire arrangement. [5] Trump then told a reporter that Lebanon was not in the deal, contradicting Sharif's statement. [6] In response, Iran's speaker of the parliament released a statement outlining how the US had violated three of Iran's 10 points and that he viewed a bilateral ceasefire as now being unreasonable. [7]

[1] https://x.com/CMShehbaz/status/2041665043423752651

[2] https://truthsocial.com/@realDonaldTrump/posts/1163657967133...

[3] https://x.com/IsraeliPM/status/2041714151374856232

[4] https://www.aljazeera.com/news/2026/4/8/hundreds-of-casualti...

[5] https://x.com/Tasnimnews_EN/status/2041886432239788297

[6] https://x.com/ElizLanders/status/2041878299454955640

[7] https://x.com/mb_ghalibaf/status/2041943537386958858

Re: Iran demands Bitcoin fees for ships passing Hormuz during ceasefire

#225

Post by HWR_14 »

ProllyInfamous wrote: post #206
HWR_14 wrote: post #197

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Is there a limit on how much the lightning network can handle? Those are pretty large transactions.

Transaction fees are based on the complexity of the inputs/outputs , not the value transacted. You are literally paying for the minimum amount of data necessary to prove you own the funded sending-address, paying to write those hashes and amounts into the blockchain . The institution handling this offchaing lightning branch can implement fees in whatever structure you agree to transact, including percentage based . L…

There are multiple competing lightning networks? I don't get how the lighting networks prevent double spending then.

It seems like a major issue when dealing with multimillion dollar transactions.

Re: Iran demands Bitcoin fees for ships passing Hormuz during ceasefire

#227

Post by sumedh »

xnyan wrote: post #171
lerp-io wrote: post #129

Iran taking USD bribe instead of obtaining nukes made it worse for them in long run.

A large segment of the Iranian political class bet their reputations on the nuclear non-proliferation deal with the US in 2015. They've all now been utterly discredited and the hardliners proven correct in all of their predictions. They can look at Ukraine who bitterly regrets giving up their nuclear weapons, or North Korea, seemingly invulnerable despite being the most pariah of pariah states. From the perspective o…

> North Korea, seemingly invulnerable

Because of China not because of the nukes.

Re: Iran demands Bitcoin fees for ships passing Hormuz during ceasefire

#228

Post by bodiekane »

deweller wrote: post #120

A "few seconds" to pay in bitcoin? So the captain is supposed to be watching for a response via email with his finger hovering over the pay button? Is the recipient address static? Surely they would use unique payment addresses if they have any hope of obfuscating payments. This all sounds more like a TV show script than an actual thought-out plan to me.

The payments are going to a government. They're not using bitcoin to hide the payments, they're using it because receiving USD or Euros or whatever would mean that a hostile government could seize the funds from the bank.

The tracking is unique though. I don't know who had the $20 in my wallet before me or what series of payments it was a part of, but crypto has the curious property that over time, essentially all crypto money will have at some point passed through wallets associated with controversial entities or transactions.

Re: Iran demands Bitcoin fees for ships passing Hormuz during ceasefire

#229

Post by bamboozled »

PowerElectronix wrote: post #151
wodenokoto wrote: post #42

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Isn't it broken with Israel continuing their war against Lebanon?

I think only the US is not bombing anyone for the time being. I think, and hope, they will slowly pull out of there and not fuck up the status quo any further.

The US can’t just walk away now because the straight is not open / secure for trade ships.

Re: Iran demands Bitcoin fees for ships passing Hormuz during ceasefire

#230

Post by bamboozled »

MarsIronPI wrote: post #186
fernandopj wrote: post #115

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Iran is ATM saying it closed the Strait again, implied that it will wait until Israel stand down at least. Even if USA insist on Israel-Hezbollah (and so Lebanon) be kept apart from any deal to end their war in Iran, it would still mean a terrible strategic and diplomatic disaster between USA and Israel, because Israel Gov' will be left with two terrible scenarios: 1) Trump Admin' will concede to Iran they'd be leavi…

> IMHO don't see how Israel-US can politically survive those two scenarios. Is that such a bad thing?

Probably for the actual innocent people who live in Israel , yes
Post reply on HN