Iran starts Bitcoin-backed ship insurance for Hormuz strait • Hacker News Board

Re: Iran starts Bitcoin-backed ship insurance for Hormuz strait

#291

Post by toasty228 » Mon, May 18, 2026, 9:54 PM UTC

chrisco255 wrote: post #229

danbruc wrote: post #197

The 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.

Iran 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.

> 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

Re: Iran starts Bitcoin-backed ship insurance for Hormuz strait

#292

Post by jonquark » Mon, May 18, 2026, 9:58 PM UTC

nradov wrote: post #231

HWR_14 wrote: post #222

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Assisting the US with regard to Iran is phenomenally unpopular. The increase in energy prices isn't outweighing people's desire not to have their country assist.

And yet national leaders do phenomenally unpopular things all the time when they decide it's necessary. In this particular case it's mostly moot because none of the other impacted countries really has the capability to act regardless of popularity or lack thereof. Like the UK chose to spend all of their money on nationalized healthcare instead of the military. I don't mean that in a critical or negative way, on balan…

The UK spends a lower fraction of its GDP on health than the US (the US is an outlier because of its system).

The UK's NHS is not why it's not taking part in this mess.

Re: Iran starts Bitcoin-backed ship insurance for Hormuz strait

#293

Post by gpm » Mon, May 18, 2026, 9:59 PM UTC

runako wrote: post #287

gpm wrote: post #275

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That doesn't seem like the relevant question. A navy barely progressing as the technology progresses by leaps and bounds is just as problematic when you're measuring its strength compared to its adversaries.

Separate discussion. I'm addressing the comment that the US Navy of today is a shadow of its former self.

No, the same discussion.

It's fair to say the British navy is a shadow of the former British navy that more or less conquered the world. It's also obvious the current one with an aircraft carrier would beat the former one with wooden ships and cannons.

The same applies to the US navy even when the difference is the quality and quantity of integrated circuits and not the difference between a telescope and radar.

Re: Iran starts Bitcoin-backed ship insurance for Hormuz strait

#294

Post by nradov » Mon, May 18, 2026, 10:00 PM UTC

nicoburns wrote: post #251

nradov wrote: post #231

Earlier quoted context omitted.

And yet national leaders do phenomenally unpopular things all the time when they decide it's necessary. In this particular case it's mostly moot because none of the other impacted countries really has the capability to act regardless of popularity or lack thereof. Like the UK chose to spend all of their money on nationalized healthcare instead of the military. I don't mean that in a critical or negative way, on balan…

Would it not be pretty counterproductive for other countries to assist the US in this case? That seems only likely to prolong / exacerbate the war. The US giving up would be much faster.

Whether it would be counterproductive or not depends on what those other countries are trying to produce. None of them particularly want to pay tribute or protection money to Iran, especially because Iran could then decide to close the strait again or raise the fee at any time. They also don't want to set a precedent that other countries might exploit for charging transit fees through their national waters. And the USA might impose secondary sanctions on any country which makes payments to Iran. So the current stalemate might last quite a while.

Re: Iran starts Bitcoin-backed ship insurance for Hormuz strait

#295

Post by ninjagoo » Mon, May 18, 2026, 10:00 PM UTC

everdrive wrote: post #20

Much 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 b…

> Much of the post-WW2 American-led world order was founded partially on the United States using its military to keep international waters open.

This completely ignores the MAD era and the Soviets taking over Eastern Europe by force. It also ignores the Korean war stalemate, the Vietnam war loss, as well the most recent Afghan loss.

Post-Soviet disintegration management, the successful integration of Eastern Europe, China, and India into the Western Bloc ways were genuine wins. That's post-1989, not post-ww2 (yes, I realize technically that's post-ww2). So there was not really a world-wide dependency between WW2 and 1989 on the American military. Western Bloc, yes, world-wide no.

The current stalemate is only a surprise to the unaware and folks listening only to American news channels. Before the beginning of the current conflict, even $20 chatgpt provided enough insight to accurately chart the course of the conflict in probabilities. Even without chatgpt, folks keeping track and keeping an eye on real news and past policy decisions and progress were able to predict that Ukraine had a very good chance of stopping Russia in its tracks.

The trouble isn't with the availability of this data, it's hubris. Time and time again. Caesar. Napoleon. Hitler. Korea. Johnson in Vietnam. Soviets in Afghanistan. US in Afghanistan. Ukraine. Iran.

But hubris exists because sometimes it works, and for quite some time. Genghis Khan. Pax Romana. Soviets in Eastern Europe. US in Western Europe. Europeans in the Americas. Russians in Eastern Asia. Europeans in Asia and Africa. Palestine. Tibet.

Why it works, and why it doesn't, is an active research topic. [1]

Analysts paid to predict the future will of course argue this vehemently from their pet PoV. And the decision-makers are too domain-challenged to know whom to believe*. They didn't have chatgpt :-)

[1] https://www.hachettebookgroup.com/titles/phillips-payson-obr...

* Or they just don't care

Re: Iran starts Bitcoin-backed ship insurance for Hormuz strait

#296

Post by phil21 » Mon, May 18, 2026, 10:01 PM UTC

gpm wrote: post #275

runako wrote: post #230

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This leads to an interesting thought experiment. Using conventional weapons only, what prior year's US Navy could beat the 2026 US Navy in combat?

That doesn't seem like the relevant question. A navy barely progressing as the technology progresses by leaps and bounds is just as problematic when you're measuring its strength compared to its adversaries.

It's both a shadow of it's former self, as well as being optimized for force projection vs. freedom of navigation/securing free trade.

It's probably even more powerful than peak cold war/WWII US Navy at force projection while adjusting for technology and adversary capability. Cruise missiles, much more capable aircraft, larger carriers, etc.

At securing the high seas or forcing open trade routes? Just the sheer loss in number of deployable warships available to surge into an area is nowhere comparable. That and logistical capability is nearly nonexistent and relies mostly on nearby basing vs. tankering/supply ships. Not to mention a much larger Merchant Marine they used to be able to fall back on.

There simply is not the ability for sustained operations at sea at any scale any longer, even if you had unlimited munitions to expend. You can certainly float a couple aircraft carriers 700 miles off some coast and keep them on station more or less indefinitely as you rotate them out, but that's really about it. And that's really the only sort of war the US Navy has had to fight for the past 30+ years.

Re: Iran starts Bitcoin-backed ship insurance for Hormuz strait

#297

Post by adrr » Mon, May 18, 2026, 10:01 PM UTC

anigbrowl wrote: post #290

adrr wrote: post #179

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Iran hasn’t ratified UNCLOS either, and claims it is not subject to it. Which isn't unique. Bunch of countries haven't ratified it and aren't legally bound by it but do follow it in spirit. US, Turkey, UAE, Israel etc.

Do you really think the US wouldn't abandon it in a heartbeat if it became a matter of strategic necessity?

Countries that haven't signed do violate it. Israel prevents ships free transit to the Gaza strip. US does naval blockades and blows up boats.

Re: Iran starts Bitcoin-backed ship insurance for Hormuz strait

#298

Post by throw310822 » Mon, May 18, 2026, 10:04 PM UTC

elzbardico wrote: post #207

Let’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…

Besides, 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.

Re: Iran starts Bitcoin-backed ship insurance for Hormuz strait

#299

Post by mooktakim » Mon, May 18, 2026, 10:05 PM UTC

everdrive wrote: post #20

Much 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 b…

American navy has blockaded countries all over the world, so it's more true that they closed international waters. Waters were open before America existed. If Americans would actually learn their history they would see that the USA blockade was the reason Japan attacked Pearl Harbour, as the Japanese needed the water to open and thought taking out Pearl Harbour would prevent the US Navy controlling the Pacific. Japan attacked the American base, USA attacked Japanese civilians with nukes.

Re: Iran starts Bitcoin-backed ship insurance for Hormuz strait

#300

Post by don_esteban » Mon, May 18, 2026, 10:05 PM UTC

infamia wrote: post #252

bparsons wrote: post #211

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The Iranians (and their Houthi proxies) have made sustained attacks on them and don't seem to have hit anything. That's because the US has kept the surface combatants far back from the Persian Gulf for the duration of the war. As far as we know, they have attempted to run the strait twice and had to turn back because they were under sustained attack. I assume these ships can defend themselves for some period of time,…

> There is a reason the US Navy fled the Persian Gulf on Feb 26 and has not returned since. Two US Arleigh Burke Class Destroyers transited Hormuz a couple of weeks ago without damage and are still there last I heard. The Iranians were really upset, but couldn't do anything to stop it. https://www.cbsnews.com/news/2-us-navy-destroyers-transit-st...

Do you have supporting evidence they are still there? I though they exited toward the Gulf of Oman around May 6/7 https://www.centcom.mil/MEDIA/PRESS-RELEASES/Press-Release-V...