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

Iran makes first import order using cryptocurrency – report

reuters.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

71–80 of 93 posts

Re: Iran makes first import order using cryptocurrency – report

#71

Post by paulproteus »

sph wrote: post #66
paulproteus wrote: post #12

For miners operating in the US, I’d like to see sanctions violations cases if they mine blocks that include transactions for Iranian (and other sanctioned) entities. This seems straightforward to me. Frankly I’m quite annoyed that my democratically elected representatives’ sanctions regime is being undermined by Americans interested in a quick buck from wasting electricity with their PC.

> This seems straightforward to me. Your comment is so unrealistic and glosses over so many details I wonder if you're the type of politician that gets elected by saying you'll ban the Internet or force porn sites to require identification, and then have to face reality that it's a little more complicated than that. I wouldn't even know where to start explaining that what you're asking for is a very hard problem even…

As I understand it, Bitcoin mining involves selecting which unconfirmed transactions (mem pool transactions) to include in the block. A common algorithm for selecting them is ones with higher fees. Another aspect could be ignoring ones from sanctioned wallet IDs. If treasury.gov had a monthly-updating CSV file of wallet IDs that are sanctioned, then the person setting up the mining software could have a cron job to refresh treasury.gov's list periodically. Would that work?

I think you're saying this would be a big hassle, maybe for miners. Can you explain that more?

Re: Iran makes first import order using cryptocurrency – report

#72

Post by spywaregorilla »

sph wrote: post #70
spywaregorilla wrote: post #40

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Nope. It's not "You cannot exchange USD for bitcoin". It's "If your organization exchanges bitcoin, you're gonna get the regulatory hammer". That affects every organization in the world that wants to do business in the united states, including shell corps, which is basically every major financial player that matters. The next decade will be interesting but not for this. The current price of btc is supported by large…

> If your organization exchanges bitcoin, you're gonna get the regulatory hammer Does the American regulatory hammer have worldwide jurisdiction? US might convince the EU to follow suit, but what if China says "sure Iran, we'll gladly buy your BTC and sell you RMB", what then? These worldwide regulatory hammers that pretty much everybody (not just in the Western world) respects are called embargoes. Good luck embargo…

> Does the American regulatory hammer have worldwide jurisdiction?

It has worldwide jurisdiction for any company that wants to do business with the US.

China already actively trades with Iran so this would be largely irrelevant. And yet the CFO of Huawei was still arrested a few years back for violating sanctions.

> This is just plain wrong.

You're right, there's also crime and sanctions avoiders

But kill the on ramps to clean western currency and this all falls apart.

Re: Iran makes first import order using cryptocurrency – report

#73

Post by xtian »

nradov wrote: post #69
xtian wrote: post #43

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"IP" is a fiction invented to justify collecting rent from unproductive assets and ultimately serves to prevent underdeveloped countries from developing industrial capacity. Every industrialized country in the world (including the US) "stole IP" when they were developing.

Any country with ICBMs pointed at us cannot plausibly claim special privileges for being "underdeveloped".

I didn't claim China was underdeveloped. They're very obviously the premier industrial power in the world.

The people demanding ahistorical special privileges are so-called "intellectual property holders". I have zero sympathies for the plight of these parasitical rent collectors. They certainly don't hold any special sympathies for the American people.

Re: Iran makes first import order using cryptocurrency – report

#74

Post by rglullis »

14 wrote: post #62
hervature wrote: post #39

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Many terrorist groups from the Middle East use captured oil wells to fund their ventures. This gets mixed with other oil from the region via places like Turkey (a NATO ally). ISIS is reported to have made $500M in 2015 [1]. Anyway, the vast majority of the world buys this oil. This is why I say that Canada + USA which produce basically as much oil as Saudi + Russia should pull a DeBeers and sell "blood free" oil but…

This will sound harsh but I just want cheap gas. And I am not the only one. So many families are struggling to get by and anything that adds to the cost of things going up would immediately oppose it. I am all for freedom oil but not when it would likely cost me more.

You are living in the richest country of the world and you are still "struggling". Now imagine the lives of the other billions of people, and specially consider those people whose prosperity was undermined or halted by your government, just so you could have "cheap gas".

I may be an antirevolutionary to the bone, but seeing some comments like these really make me reevaluate my priors.

Re: Iran makes first import order using cryptocurrency – report

#75

Post by xtian »

midasuni wrote: post #55
xtian wrote: post #20

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I’m quite annoyed at the sanctions regime conducted in my name with no democratic mandate or oversight whatsoever.

You know the US is a democracy right? You might not like the results but you do have a voice.

No, it's not: https://www.cambridge.org/core/journals/perspectives-on-poli...

Even less so on issues like this, where the two privileged parties have the exact same policy despite it not benefiting the American people.

Re: Iran makes first import order using cryptocurrency – report

#76

Post by nradov »

xtian wrote: post #73
nradov wrote: post #69

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Any country with ICBMs pointed at us cannot plausibly claim special privileges for being "underdeveloped".

I didn't claim China was underdeveloped. They're very obviously the premier industrial power in the world. The people demanding ahistorical special privileges are so-called "intellectual property holders". I have zero sympathies for the plight of these parasitical rent collectors. They certainly don't hold any special sympathies for the American people.

I'm not sure what you mean by "ahistorical special privileges". Intellectual property rights have been around for centuries. Patents and copyright are specifically mentioned in the Constitution.

Re: Iran makes first import order using cryptocurrency – report

#77

Post by rufusroflpunch »

spywaregorilla wrote: post #11
rufusroflpunch wrote: post #10

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's just game theory. If banning it won't kill it (and it won't in this case), then you need to embrace it or lose out. The best they can hope for is to control the on-ramps and off-ramps.

Banning the on and off ramps is effectively going to kill it.

It would hurt it, definitely wouldn't kill it.

There's still an economy. You can use decentralized exchanges like Bisq, Robosats, etc to buy and sell Bitcoin, even if they banned every centralized exchange. You can also directly transact Bitcoin for goods and services in the underground market.

Re: Iran makes first import order using cryptocurrency – report

#78

Post by nradov »

alfiedotwtf wrote: post #15
Synaesthesia wrote: post #6

Why doesn't the US and other governments ban Bitcoin?

Transactions from your Bitcoin wallet can be worked out with a pen and paper, and then passed onto others by hand, entered into their Bitcoin node by typing in what's written down. By advocating banning Bitcoin, you just banned Free Speech. See also: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pretty_Good_Privacy#Criminal_i...

US federal courts haven't interpreted it that way, and the precedent you cited isn't applicable. Financial transactions with sanctioned entities aren't entitled to First Amendment protections. The technical means are entirely irrelevant, regardless of whether the transaction is performed with paper or on a computer.

Re: Iran makes first import order using cryptocurrency – report

#79

Post by vangelis »

LatteLazy wrote: post #49
vangelis wrote: post #24

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You don't have to ban crypto. You could just ban exchanges. You can always exchange Bitcoin for cash and back, but that's a lot harder.

That's the same game though: if I know a guy who can get me weed or whatever, I will know a guy who can get me bitcoin. And since there is no physical product or evidence it's actually much easier, my friend from Amsterdam will have a lot of trouble bringing me weed, he will have zero difficulty sending $100 worth of BTC to an address I give him. The idea that you can just ban things and they will go away should have…

How does your friend from Amsterdam convert his crypto to Euros? The value of crypto more or less relies on there being an off-ramp to local currency. Also he should use Monero!

Re: Iran makes first import order using cryptocurrency – report

#80

Post by xtian »

nradov wrote: post #76
xtian wrote: post #73

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I didn't claim China was underdeveloped. They're very obviously the premier industrial power in the world. The people demanding ahistorical special privileges are so-called "intellectual property holders". I have zero sympathies for the plight of these parasitical rent collectors. They certainly don't hold any special sympathies for the American people.

I'm not sure what you mean by "ahistorical special privileges". Intellectual property rights have been around for centuries. Patents and copyright are specifically mentioned in the Constitution.

https://www.history.com/news/industrial-revolution-spies-eur...
Post reply on HN