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

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

#681

Post by protocolture » Tue, May 19, 2026, 11:40 PM UTC

ericmay wrote: post #612

protocolture wrote: post #443

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>If the US military fails to keep international waters open, that harms everyone, and everyone more so than the United States. Only in the sense that the US has forgotten its a participant in trade. But that seems to be pretty standard at this point. >There's this continued misunderstanding that America did this or that, or securing global shipping is for America to do, or what have you. I honestly would be happy if…

> Only in the sense that the US has forgotten its a participant in trade. But that seems to be pretty standard at this point. The US already has a navy and already can and will protect US shipping interests (which may include allies or other entities). What will the rest of the world do? > It would be nice if they hadn't stuck their dick in this particular bee hive. It's not that we collectively expect the US to secu…

>The US already has a navy and already can and will protect US shipping interests (which may include allies or other entities). What will the rest of the world do?

What they currently do. There arent US armed escorts everywhere.

>You don't expect the US to secure shipping but the rest of the world does.

No they dont.

>More likely the UK and Australia will join the US.

They have already signed up to Frances plan. https://www.minister.defence.gov.au/statements/2026-05-13/de...

And rejected Trumps.

>You won't have successful trade without the USA - please stop these immature fantasies. They're not healthy for you.

Actually your ability for fantasy far outstretches anyone elses.

>We haven't underestimated them.

Now you are just telling jokes.

>If it was so cheaply lost it wasn't worth much in the first place.

Its been degrading for the last decade. It didnt disappear yesterday. It took more than a single administration of threatening and attempting to humiliate allies before you lost it all.

>Ok if you'll manage without us I say we just stop altogether and lift sanctions on Russia.

Ok bye.

>The US even today is bombing Iran and taking out drone manufacturing capabilities so they can't supply Russia who turns around and bombs Ukrainians.

I love how these retrospective justifications turn up when the original ones are completely destroyed.

1000 times as many US weapons are in hands of people dangerous to the world.

>You're so ready to defend Iran/Russia that you're twisting in circles saying the US didn't bomb Iran enough, and the US is also bad because we left some light trucks in Iraq, and coming to the moral defense of Iran building drones to sell to Russia to kill Ukrainians because US bad. You know European countries, China, and Russia and more sell weapons too, right?

No you just cant read.

>Maybe the US and Israel are just right and you're wrong. I certainly think so too.

Yes its clear you have gorged yourself on their propaganda.

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

#682

Post by YZF » Wed, May 20, 2026, 12:16 AM UTC

lowbloodsugar wrote: post #475

YZF wrote: post #434

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Trump promised he would end the deal and he ended the deal. Why is that "madman ripped up that deal"? https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/donald-trump/trump-kept-his... https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_withdrawal_from_... https://www.nytimes.com/2018/05/08/world/middleeast/trump-ir... https://www.atlanticcouncil.org/blogs/new-atlanticist/trump-... Many including Trump have long said the deal was a terrible de…

"I'm gonna stab myself in the face!" - stabs self in face Sure, clearly not a madman if he tells you he's going to do it first. o_O

If reasons are given, and it's an election promise, and you win the election, and you deliver on your promise... Most people who say this is good and how democracy should work. I understand that you disagree with the decision and disagree with the reasons but something doing something you disagree with is not the definition of mad.

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

#683

Post by pamcake » Wed, May 20, 2026, 12:21 AM UTC

hggh wrote: post #600

freerk wrote: post #206

Earlier quoted context omitted.

No, that doesn't work with Bitcoin, it only works with a fork of Bitcoin that has less than 0.5% of the value of Bitcoin.

Value doesn't have anything to do with utility

In this case it does. You can't funnel huge amounts through a coin with usually small volume and market cap and expect any sense of anonymity or privacy. The delta makes it obvious. It would probably be visible via movements on markets too.

For smaller amounts this is not a problem for the same coin and network.

Your volume might support $10k but not $10m.

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

#684

Post by tremon » Wed, May 20, 2026, 12:59 AM UTC

_DeadFred_ wrote: post #659

bigyabai wrote: post #656

Earlier quoted context omitted.

On the hierarchy of disagreement, attacking the character of either side is the lowest form of intelligent commentary you can make: https://paulgraham.com/disagree.html > Do you not think horrible behaviors should be highlighted/called out/brought up? Or just that US leadership Epstein connections should be? If non-sequiturs are your best argument, then yes, you you have nothing to contribute by participating in good…

I simply stated "You'd think these Epstein file guys would be on better terms with a country whose religious and political leaders sanctify that kind of behavior, not going to war with them.". Seems like a reasonable comment. They are all awful people. Paul Graham is saying you should not call people you are in a discussion with names. If I called OP names your link would fit. Calling out a horrific regime that murde…

Paul Graham is saying you should not call people you are in a discussion with names

Only if you don't care to read past bullet point 1. If you had cared enough to read at least one paragraph further, you would have found:

> DH1. Ad Hominem.

> An ad hominem attack is not quite as weak as mere name-calling. [..] It's still a very weak form of disagreement, though

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

#685

Post by ipaddr » Wed, May 20, 2026, 1:39 AM UTC

_DeadFred_ wrote: post #670

ipaddr wrote: post #665

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Which nobody disagreed with. Where we disagreed was around women and children protesting and getting killed vs armed men with machine guns. You got tricked with AI photos and so did the media. My link shows how you guys got fooled and the technical details around that. Care to double down?

According to the Iranian regime all killed were Iranian: "It described all those killed as “children of this soil” and affirmed President Masoud Pezeshkian’s commitment to protecting and vindicating their rights." And even the regime could only figure out how to label a subset of them as 'rioters and terrorists': "A government statement issued in late January indicated that over 600 of the deceased were rioters and t…

There are confirming 6,000 and 146 under 18 according to your links. Which doesn't suggest families it suggests teens probably mostly teen boys.

Again you are blindly using links without reading them or using critical thinking.

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

#686

Post by _DeadFred_ » Wed, May 20, 2026, 2:13 AM UTC

tremon wrote: post #684

_DeadFred_ wrote: post #659

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I simply stated "You'd think these Epstein file guys would be on better terms with a country whose religious and political leaders sanctify that kind of behavior, not going to war with them.". Seems like a reasonable comment. They are all awful people. Paul Graham is saying you should not call people you are in a discussion with names. If I called OP names your link would fit. Calling out a horrific regime that murde…

Paul Graham is saying you should not call people you are in a discussion with names Only if you don't care to read past bullet point 1. If you had cared enough to read at least one paragraph further, you would have found: > DH1. Ad Hominem. > An ad hominem attack is not quite as weak as mere name-calling. [..] It's still a very weak form of disagreement, though

I responded to bigyabai phrase of "On the hierarchy of disagreement, attacking the character of either side". Which I did not do. I did not go after someone I disagreed with's in the discussions character. I simply said 'you would think both sides monsters would be on friendlier terms with each other'. Responding with a wall of text relating to the entirety of the PG article would have been odd. I addressed the point made in the comment I replied to.

From the article on ad homimen "Saying that an author lacks" again, I never went after the other posters here (until later in this reply in order to productively highlight points brought up by others). PGs article is about responding to posts and how speak civilly (the posters here being 'the author' he is referring to). I see quite a few posts replying to me speaking to me specifically contrary to the entire point of the PG article. For example "Only if you don't care to read past bullet point 1. If you had cared enough to read" of your own post.

But to your point, the original comment by spiderfarmer that I responded to initially must really trigger your 'ad hominem attack' concerns:

" the moronic US, their feeble leader as well as their utterly corrupt and incompetent politicians. A toxic mix of staggering arrogance, moral bankruptcy, a lack of strategic thinking, non-existing historical awareness and a desperate need to divert attention because of the Epstein files.

Try debating a MAGA supporter. The stupidity is astounding."

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

#687

Post by AuthAuth » Wed, May 20, 2026, 2:15 AM UTC

ebbi wrote: post #448

AuthAuth wrote: post #444

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm not making the case they should follow international law you are.

I'm not, either.

You're saying international law has no value to iran because the US and Isreal have no violated it. Im saying Iran commited to violating international law long ago and thus in a war with Iran no one would expect international law to be followed by either party. Sounds like you agree with the last part but maybe disagree with the first claim?

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

#688

Post by _DeadFred_ » Wed, May 20, 2026, 2:22 AM UTC

cnd78A wrote: post #674

bigyabai wrote: post #656

Earlier quoted context omitted.

On the hierarchy of disagreement, attacking the character of either side is the lowest form of intelligent commentary you can make: https://paulgraham.com/disagree.html > Do you not think horrible behaviors should be highlighted/called out/brought up? Or just that US leadership Epstein connections should be? If non-sequiturs are your best argument, then yes, you you have nothing to contribute by participating in good…

Iranian child marriages do not reframe Israel too to be fair "They're 15, Married With Children: Inside an Israeli Hasidic Cult's Code of Silence" (the gov and the population knows it, but it's ok) : https://archive.is/v9Amc#selection-699.0-699.83

I'm not seeing where they rent out their children via temporarily marriages as the Shia mullahs in Iran have given religious sanction/approval/doctrine of or like the similar behaviors highlighted in the Epstein files. Can you help me find that bit that relates to what I was speaking to?

That said allowing child brides is horrific, I agree. Especially when it seems to be accepted by the highest levels of a religion or even worse when it's practiced by a religions leaders.

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

#689

Post by handfuloflight » Wed, May 20, 2026, 2:22 AM UTC

jameshilliard wrote: post #672

handfuloflight wrote: post #655

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"There is certainly no genocide in Gaza" -- you are directly contradicting a formal UN Commission of Inquiry finding from September 2025. This is not an opinion piece or a fringe report. The UN Independent International Commission of Inquiry on the Occupied Palestinian Territory concluded after a two-year investigation that Israel committed four of the five genocidal acts defined under the 1948 Genocide Convention, a…

> The UN Independent International Commission of Inquiry on the Occupied Palestinian Territory The UN(which is itself a party that has perpetuated the conflict through mismanagement of the UNRWA) has essentially zero credibility in regard to anything involving Israel[0]. > You say there is no universally accepted definition of terrorism, then said nothing to explain how you applied the term with such confidence to th…

[flagged]

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

#690

Post by _DeadFred_ » Wed, May 20, 2026, 2:35 AM UTC

ipaddr wrote: post #685

_DeadFred_ wrote: post #670

Earlier quoted context omitted.

According to the Iranian regime all killed were Iranian: "It described all those killed as “children of this soil” and affirmed President Masoud Pezeshkian’s commitment to protecting and vindicating their rights." And even the regime could only figure out how to label a subset of them as 'rioters and terrorists': "A government statement issued in late January indicated that over 600 of the deceased were rioters and t…

There are confirming 6,000 and 146 under 18 according to your links. Which doesn't suggest families it suggests teens probably mostly teen boys. Again you are blindly using links without reading them or using critical thinking.

The regime says "the total number of fatalities was 3,117". They then state "A government statement issued in late January indicated that over 600 of the deceased were rioters and terrorists, with the remainder being civilians and security forces."

That leaves quite a few civilians murdered by the Iranian regime. 2,517. Murdered. Non-CIA. Non-rioters. Non-terrorists. Civilians. Murdered. By their own government. Here are the faces a few of the 2,517 the regime admits they murdered: https://www.bbc.com/persian/resources/idt-c005edd8-7204-4c74... here are the names of a few of the children that were murdered https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Children_killed_during_the_Jan... I do not claim either are exhaustive lists, they are simply a few of the many victims (2,517 according to the Iranian regimes official position).

We haven't even talked about the 42,486 total arrests the regime made (which could not possibly all be CIA). 42,486 total arrests feels very secret police/repressive like the SAVAK of the 1950s.

Your responses again and again aimed at me such as "using critical thinking." are in pretty severe violation of the HN guidelines. It's best to speak to what is being said, not to make malicious statements/judgements at those you disagree with.