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

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

#361

Post by Jensson » Mon, May 18, 2026, 11:18 PM UTC

nerfbatplz wrote: post #130

Jensson wrote: post #111

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Frankly it's a bit absurd to complain that your ships can't transit a country's waters while you bomb them. The issue is they block all non-Iranian ships, not just American ships. Basically nobody would have complained if they only blocked American ships.

Incorrect, plenty of countries have had their ships transit the Strait including China, Philippines and Pakistan https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/c79jqx1xdy9o

They shot at Indian vessels, so you are wrong they are blocking neutral nations. India is not allied to USA or Israel. That they let some vessels through doesn't mean they don't shoot at neutral ships, they shoot at most neutral ships.

https://iranwire.com/en/news/152407-30-ships-passed-through-...

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

#362

Post by Jensson » Mon, May 18, 2026, 11:22 PM UTC

lesuorac wrote: post #325

jazz9k wrote: post #279

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The plan was for it to stay closed and have the US sell oil. The US is now exporting more oil than it has in a decade. Why can none of these supposedly smart people see this plan?

There's no 4d chess plan here. Trump thought it would go exactly as Venezuela and has no idea how to fix it. They tried to kill enough of Iran's leadership to get to somebody that would be subservient but it turns out nobody is left alive in Iran that is.

Well regardless this situation strengthens USA's economic position and weakens China, so its not a bad spot to be in. That it also strengthens Russia doesn't matter much since they are no longer seen as the great enemy, after their performance in the Ukraine war was lacking.

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

#363

Post by SilentM68 » Mon, May 18, 2026, 11:22 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…

Maybe there was another reason for the Iran strikes?

https://www.facebook.com/reel/1448330470095627

Thank you for letting me in!

Sol Roth

PS:

Hope you like the décor. I’m redecorating your thoughts permanently.

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

#364

Post by DoctorOetker » Mon, May 18, 2026, 11:22 PM UTC

don_esteban wrote: post #305

DoctorOetker wrote: post #226

Earlier quoted context omitted.

suppose one has N independently developed interception systems (from detection till physical interception attempt), each with an intercept success rate of 90%. a rudimentary calculation then gives the probability of hitting (not sinking) the ship as 0.1^N per launched missile; so it seems that given enough budget to spend on independently developed missile interception systems allows to drive down the penetration suc…

You have abstracted things a bit too far. Unless your interceptor system is unobtainium laser system with unobtainium cooling system, backed-up by unobtainium power source, you are going to run out of interceptor missiles (or even Phalanx bullets) way sooner than 'million missile attempts'. Quite possibly 100-200 Shaheds + half a dozen proper anti-ship missiles will cause you to turn tail.

equally unobtainium as the 1 M missiles aimed at the ship.

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

#365

Post by mrandish » Mon, May 18, 2026, 11:23 PM UTC

overfeed wrote: post #322

infamia wrote: post #252

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> 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...

If it went so swimmingly, why only twice then, when there are thousands of marooned ships in need of escort services?

Transiting by themselves is a lot different than escorting merchant vessels. By themselves warships are free to maneuver at any time and do so at military speeds. Convoy duty with merchant vessels requires repeatedly moving slowly along a predictable route for sustained periods. Mobility and speed are two of a warship's main strengths.

The extreme narrowness of the strait right next to so much enemy-controlled shoreline is a unique problem. All of the destroyers and frigates from all the world's navies combined couldn't sustain protecting the massive number of merchant vessels wishing to transit the Strait of Hormuz on a daily basis.

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

#366

Post by nradov » Mon, May 18, 2026, 11:30 PM UTC

ImPostingOnHN wrote: post #344

Jensson wrote: post #331

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Many countries have said they will help patrol the strait as long as the war stops. Iran wont be able to keep this after the war. Iran wont declare war against the entire world, so they wont shoot down their destroyers.

The attack on Iran was an attack on the globe, causing energy and supply chain issues for everybody, including the attackers. Other countries are not volunteering to help prosecute more attacks on Iran, because they are already victims of those attacks, and it's bad enough that the USA and israel aren't even apologizing for hurting them, much less paying for the damages. Thus, the offer to "help patrol the strait" on…

So what? Attacking Iran was a stupid move, but the US and Israeli regimes don't particularly care about the other victims whining. If other countries are going to make themselves dependent on fossil fuels from the Persian Gulf region then they'll either have to secure their own sea lines of communication or accept that supplies are unreliable. Asking for apologies or payments won't accomplish anything. That is the geopolitical reality.

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

#367

Post by iamkrazy » Mon, May 18, 2026, 11:31 PM UTC

ck2 wrote: post #10

jauntywundrkind wrote: post #2

[flagged]

Kicked 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…

With Alberta joining the US, forget about Dems getting the Senate for next 50 years.

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

#368

Post by ImPostingOnHN » Mon, May 18, 2026, 11:35 PM UTC

nradov wrote: post #366

ImPostingOnHN wrote: post #344

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The attack on Iran was an attack on the globe, causing energy and supply chain issues for everybody, including the attackers. Other countries are not volunteering to help prosecute more attacks on Iran, because they are already victims of those attacks, and it's bad enough that the USA and israel aren't even apologizing for hurting them, much less paying for the damages. Thus, the offer to "help patrol the strait" on…

So what? Attacking Iran was a stupid move, but the US and Israeli regimes don't particularly care about the other victims whining. If other countries are going to make themselves dependent on fossil fuels from the Persian Gulf region then they'll either have to secure their own sea lines of communication or accept that supplies are unreliable. Asking for apologies or payments won't accomplish anything. That is the ge…

> the US and Israeli regimes don't particularly care about the other victims whining

This does seem to be true of israel, but as for the USA, it does not, hence the USA limiting their attacks.

> If other countries are going to make themselves dependent on fossil fuels from the Persian Gulf region then they'll either have to secure their own sea lines of communication or accept that supplies are unreliable.

This sort of rhetoric is why other countries do not support the USA and israel: the other countries already did that, then the USA and israel came and attacked those supply lines, thus attacking those countries.

It strikes me as gaslighting abuser language to attack someone else, then blame it on them for not protecting themselves better. It's better for the attackers to acknowledge their mistakes, apologize for them, and pay restitution.

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

#369

Post by Cyph0n » Mon, May 18, 2026, 11:38 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.

Replace Iran and IRGC with Israel and IDF and you have a winner - one that is actually in possession of undeclared nuclear arms and refuses to cooperate with the IAEA.

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

#370

Post by EthanHeilman » Mon, May 18, 2026, 11:39 PM UTC

YZF wrote: post #351

EthanHeilman wrote: post #256

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The bigger issue is the tankers. The US Navy isn't going to be happy patrolling the strait sure, but even if they did they wouldn't be able to protect the tankers enough for it to make sense for tankers to take the risk. The last time this happened the US opened the strait by accidentally shooting down an Iranian passenger plane after sinking a large chunk of Iranian navy. The Iranians assumed the US shoot the passen…

I think "Iran was considering a peace deal" is a bit of a stretch here. Iran was stalling for time, not willing to give anything, and the Strait was indeed open. If they won't give anything now why should they have given anything before. What does Iran still have to lose? Well, a lot. All their oil is exported through the strait that is now blockaded by the US. The regime while having survived so far and executing th…

> I think "Iran was considering a peace deal" is a bit of a stretch here.

Iran was considering a peace deal. I agree that the most plausible was they would reject it.

> What does Iran still have to lose? Well, a lot.

The US could do this, sure, but then Iran would have even less to lose. This might work if the US started small and threatened escalation to try to compel Iran, but the US started at massive escalation so any additional airstrikes are likely to be less escalatory and thus less of a threat.

Even worse, there is a fundamental problem with madman theory, if Iran believes they are dealing with a madman, then threats aren't effective because a mad man doesn't keep promises. If you think your opponent is not rational, then you should not expect them to follow cause and effect.

> Iran is never going to capitulate, until it capitulates. Their rhetoric is going to remain that the US has no more levers and can't change anything, because admitting otherwise invites those levers to be engaged.

I agree that we don't know exactly how much pressure is on Iran. Iran historically has been willing to suffer almost any cost. During the Iran Iraq war then sent enormous numbers of teenagers in human wave attacks over and over. It is my estimation that the current war with the US has helped to stabilize the Iranian government and that they benefit more from the war continuing than from a peace deal.

The only military lever the US has left on the table is an invasion of Iran. Maybe limited to the coastline or maybe complete regime change. Trump has not even attempted to bluff that he is doing this.