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

81–90 of 93 posts

Re: Iran makes first import order using cryptocurrency – report

#81

Post by vangelis »

sph wrote: post #68
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.

> You could just ban exchanges. US has tried the ban hammer both for alcohol and then for drugs, how has that worked out for them? That would just create a massive underground black market, this time even more pernicious because it's international, with state-level actors.

Where does the clean money to exchange for crypto come from if there's no legitimate on-ramp and off-ramp? You could at least exchange drugs and alcohol for dirty fiat.

Re: Iran makes first import order using cryptocurrency – report

#82

Post by frozencell »

devoutsalsa wrote: post #8
LatteLazy wrote: post #5

At this point, Sanctions (and really all of US-Iran policy) have failed completely so I see this as a net win for everyone...

I just want KYC rules to go away. The user experience is quite horrible.

Just use Monero or Bitsk?

Re: Iran makes first import order using cryptocurrency – report

#83

Post by nradov »

xtian wrote: post #80
nradov wrote: post #76

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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...

What's your point? Countries have always spied on each other. It would have been entirely reasonable for those European countries to sanction the USA for IP violations.

Re: Iran makes first import order using cryptocurrency – report

#84

Post by sph »

paulproteus wrote: post #71
sph wrote: post #66

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> 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 r…

Just a couple examples off the top of my head (on mobile right now)

- One can create an unlimited number of addresses for a single wallet. The size of your banned_addresses.csv updated every morning is for all intents and purposes unbounded.

- The hard problem is proving if the beneficiary is an Iranian national. It's already difficult to do in the regular economy with KYC regulations and everything is government controlled (shell companies, etc.), doing so with Bitcoin is even harder. I don't mean hard as in "the US govt has the resources to do it", I mean hard as it's pretty much impossible.

Please don't take this the wrong way, but learn a little bit about Bitcoin, if you really want to do something about the problems it poses. It's overall pretty simple. Otherwise you're just another person that has strong opinions about something they don't know anything about.

Re: Iran makes first import order using cryptocurrency – report

#85

Post by LatteLazy »

vangelis wrote: post #79
LatteLazy wrote: post #49

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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!

I assume somewhere on earth exchange will remain legal (eg Amsterdam). So my friend just uses services legal to him locally.

And even if it doesn't, your friendly local drug dealer, who may already be trading crypto to purchase product, will presumably offer exchange services. No one needs an exchange they can just charge a spread between people wanting to buy and those wanting to sell. That's how money change already works after all...

And you're right about Monero!

Re: Iran makes first import order using cryptocurrency – report

#86

Post by xtian »

nradov wrote: post #83
xtian wrote: post #80

Earlier quoted context omitted.

https://www.history.com/news/industrial-revolution-spies-eur...

What's your point? Countries have always spied on each other. It would have been entirely reasonable for those European countries to sanction the USA for IP violations.

Who would that have benefited?

Re: Iran makes first import order using cryptocurrency – report

#87

Post by hestefisk »

nradov wrote: post #67
hestefisk wrote: post #23

Question is: why are these sanctions here in the first place? The US uses its control of the Dollar-based system to wield its power as it sees fit. It’s apparently ok for the US to have as many nukes as it sees fit, but not ok for others to have the same.

Iran is being sanctioned for multiple reasons. The primary one is because they ratified the Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons (NPT), but then (allegedly) violated the terms. That treaty comes with a mix of benefits and responsibilities, and it specifically calls out the permanent Security Council members (including the US) as being allowed to have nukes. If Iran wanted to have nukes then they should…

Case in point, though: US is allowed nukes because they are “special”, the rest cannot. On “state sponsor of terrorism”, perhaps it’s time for the US to realise it’s a case of the pot calling the kettle back: 70+ years of clandestine operations supporting iron-fisted right-wing regimes in Indonesia (Suharto), Chile (Pinochet), Cuba (Bay of Pigs invasion / project Mongoose), Nicaragua (Contras), Iraq (Hussein prior to the US flipping on him in the invasion of Iraq), DRC (assassination of Lumumba) etc. My point here is not to be a dick, but simply to show that the US itself has sponsored hordes of so-called “state terrorists” and they get to pick and choose who is a terrorist or not based on some list in the State Department. That is not right.

Re: Iran makes first import order using cryptocurrency – report

#88

Post by hestefisk »

cjpearson wrote: post #48
hestefisk wrote: post #23

Question is: why are these sanctions here in the first place? The US uses its control of the Dollar-based system to wield its power as it sees fit. It’s apparently ok for the US to have as many nukes as it sees fit, but not ok for others to have the same.

> why are these sanctions here in the first place? Initially they were a response to the Iran Hostage Crisis. Since the Clinton administration, the reasons have been Iran's nuclear program and support for groups such as Hezbollah and Hamas. > It’s apparently ok for the US to have as many nukes as it sees fit, but not ok for others to have the same. This isn't just a US goal. 190 countries have agreed to the Non-Proli…

Prime example of US rhetoric though. The US is allowed nukes because they see themselves as the “benevolent dictator” of the world and only real superpower. Therefore “we” can hold nukes and tell everyone else what to do. On Hamas, it’s a great example of why the US system of designating who is a “terrorist” or not simply doesn’t work. In Palestine, Hamas are central to the liberation of Palestine from Israeli acts of aggression and terror against the Palestinians. Some would call them rebels or legitimate, organised political groups (as with PLO). Hamas have done a lot of wrong things and I’m not defending them. My point is merely to prove that just because it’s on a US list, doesn’t mean it is right.

Re: Iran makes first import order using cryptocurrency – report

#89

Post by Helikentio »

rglullis wrote: post #61
Helikentio wrote: post #54

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Strawman argument. No one is stating that this might not be an issue. People are totally able to complain about multiple things. But let me tell you: it's much easier to bash crypto as it's new and fresh and very scammy and bad. It's a good thing that we stand up and say no to it for now to stop the already giant waste it creates. We don't need an Additional co2 creater with zero benefit.

anyone who equates "crypto" with "Proof of Work" shows automatically their ignorance or dishonesty when arguing. Ethereum will switch to PoS next month, and there will be hundreds of thousands of nodes around the world, in aggregate they will run on a fraction of the energy consumed by the millions of video game consoles while idling . By all means, complain about Proof of Work all you want but get off the high horse…

Quite arrogant from you to assume I don't know what you said.

I'm aware of it.

Eth hasn't switched yet, the GPU problem was real and the terrawatts 'crypto' consumes is also real.

Of course I simply slightly when I don't 'bother' to name not 10 or 50 different pow blockchains but why not?

The general problem exists. It hurts us all much more than it helps and crypto threads are the correct place to comment on this issue.

And yes the current drought might not be created by crypto alone but that doesn't make it any better.

Re: Iran makes first import order using cryptocurrency – report

#90

Post by rglullis »

Helikentio wrote: post #89
rglullis wrote: post #61

Earlier quoted context omitted.

anyone who equates "crypto" with "Proof of Work" shows automatically their ignorance or dishonesty when arguing. Ethereum will switch to PoS next month, and there will be hundreds of thousands of nodes around the world, in aggregate they will run on a fraction of the energy consumed by the millions of video game consoles while idling . By all means, complain about Proof of Work all you want but get off the high horse…

Quite arrogant from you to assume I don't know what you said. I'm aware of it. Eth hasn't switched yet, the GPU problem was real and the terrawatts 'crypto' consumes is also real. Of course I simply slightly when I don't 'bother' to name not 10 or 50 different pow blockchains but why not? The general problem exists. It hurts us all much more than it helps and crypto threads are the correct place to comment on this is…

> I'm aware of it.

Then it is not ignorance, which leaves you the alternative: dishonesty.

What really pisses me off is the perma-comment of "we don't need crypto", "there are no use cases", "it is only for scams", etc. Go ask people in Argentina how they are managing to keep some sense of financial normalcy, lots of them will tell you "crypto".

Post reply on HN