He said that the tariff is $1 per barrel of oil, adding that empty tankers can pass freely. "Once the email arrives and Iran completes its assessment, vessels are given a few seconds to pay in Bitcoin, ensuring they can't be traced or confiscated due to sanctions," Hosseini added.

top 97 comments

sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] 58 points 7 months ago (10 children)

Honestly, the biggest mistake they've made here is that they're not demanding Monero instead.

  • source
  • hideshow 10 child comments
  • [–] 21 points 7 months ago* (3 children)

    It's easier for people to get Bitcoin, Iran could deal with the cleaning / mixing themselves after. This is already going to create friction so keeping it lower might help?

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [–] 20 points 7 months ago (2 children)

    Oh, if they demanded Monero, people would figure out how to get it.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 9 points 7 months ago (1 child)

    theres only like 6.5B usd worth of monero (compared to ~1Trilion BTC)

    At 20Milion barrels of oil (/ dolars if its $1 a barrel) a day, theyd own all the monero within a year, meaning theyd have told pretty actively be selling it back onto the market for another currency to keep a supply for shippers to use. Compared to BTC where they'd need 136 years of hoarding to accumulate it all

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 11 points 7 months ago (2 children)

    Right? I was like dang you're already half way there lol.

    The reason though is that they probably don't want to discourage payments because I have seen businesses refuse to use Monero in ransomware attacks because their insurance agreement complicates payout on a fundamentally untraceable currency. Even if Bitcoin is technically decentralized, they can report the transaction and specific currency blocks to whatever federal agency is responsible for fraud.

    Still, why not offer both and put a 5% discount on Monero.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 2 points 7 months ago

    It's all about whether Binance lets them cash out or not, but mixing within BRICS is sure to make it clean enough, as Binance getting/keeping sovereign clients is good for Binance, and not worth appeasing US BS to turn it away.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 73 points 7 months ago (2 children)

    No Uncle Sam's paper dollars? ohh boy

  • source
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 70 points 7 months ago (5 children)

    Bitcoin is for dodging sanctions and the influence America has over the international banking and payment systems. It's also may shield third parties from sanctions the US may impose on those who transact with Iran.

  • source
  • hideshow 5 child comments
  • [–] 64 points 7 months ago (3 children)

    Reminder that bitcoin is not now nor has it ever been anonymous.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [–] 47 points 7 months ago (3 children)

    I heard they are also accepting iTunes gift cards.

  • source
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [–] 16 points 7 months ago (1 child)

    Did they give up using the yuan?

  • source
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 15 points 7 months ago (1 child)

    It's ok because the binance CEO guy purchased a pardon in helping Iran laundering their BTC

  • source
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 13 points 7 months ago (12 children)

    How could that work? Doesn't it take some time for a bitcoin transaction to get pulled into the chain?

  • source
  • hideshow 12 child comments
  • [–] 16 points 7 months ago

    At the size of transactions they'd be doing, it'd probably be worth it to set a high fee so that it gets picked up and processed faster. Should still be peanuts compared to the value of cargo these tankers are carrying

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 14 points 7 months ago (3 children)

    It takes 10 minutes to get a single confirmation, but I'm assuming that it takes more than 10 minutes for a ship to transit this waterway, so it wouldn't matter.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [–] 1 point 7 months ago (1 child)

    Yeah, but the article says they have seconds to pay with bitcoin.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 3 points 7 months ago

    Something tells me the article doesn't understand the way Bitcoin works. A transaction takes 10 minutes to clear on-chain, unless you're using the lightning network, and the lightning network is fucking terrible, especially for high-value transactions like this. Because you can be rug-pulled. That and you can't send high-value transactions on a lightning network because every link in the chain has to have the proper amount of liquidity to make that transaction occur.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 6 points 7 months ago (2 children)
  • [–] 3 points 7 months ago (2 children)

    Layer 2 networks like the lightning network operated in the milliseconds time frame.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 2 points 7 months ago (1 child)

    Doesn't that require trust in the provider hosting the off chain transactions? And lightning transactions can get preempted by conflicting moves from a wallet, and invalidated? I'm no expert, but it seems like these big regular transactions would be targets for abuse.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 46 points 7 months ago (16 children)

    Bitcoin finely found a use case that's not crime. Take that crypto haters.

  • source
  • hideshow 16 child comments
  • [–] 7 points 7 months ago (12 children)

    Technically it still is a crime since charging money for access to navigable waters is a violation of international law.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 12 child comments
  • [–] 3 points 7 months ago (6 children)

    What about Panama Canal, Suez canal, St Lawrence Seaway? Is it fine to charge money for those waters?

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 6 child comments
  • [–] 3 points 7 months ago (5 children)

    They're not natural waterways, somebody had to make them so the law doesn't apply. Same for Great Lakes Waterway.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 5 child comments
  • [–] 3 points 7 months ago (4 children)

    Besides, international law only applies to you if you agree to it. Both US and Iran do not agree with this.

    US also has a law that say US can use military force against the ICC if any US citizen is arrested by the ICC.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
  • [+] 1 point 7 months ago (3 children)
  • [–] 1 point 7 months ago

    International laws have no meaning if nations don't agree to it.

    For example, the United States has laws and policies designed to prevent the arrest of U.S. personnel and its allies by the International Criminal Court (ICC). The 2002 American Service-Members' Protection Act (ASPA) authorizes the US President to use "all means necessary and appropriate" to release U.S. or allied personnel detained by the ICC, often termed the "Hague Invasion Act".

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 3 points 7 months ago (3 children)
  • [–] 8 points 7 months ago* (2 children)

    This would be the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS). It's interesting that the US is among the nations that have never ratified the treaty.

    Also, Denmark has a long 500+ year history of charging ships to transit in and out of the Baltic Sea, so this really isn't a new concept (Sound Tolls).

    All foreign ships passing through the strait, whether en route to or from Denmark or not, had to stop in Helsingør and pay a toll to the Danish Crown. If a ship refused to stop, cannons in both Helsingør and Helsingborg could open fire and sink it.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 46 points 7 months ago (2 children)

    I'm surprised Elon didn't convince them to take the payments in Dogecoin....

  • source
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 7 points 7 months ago (5 children)

    I'd absolutely use crypto if it was more available in anything I'd want to pay for. So far it's mostly just VPNs and donations

  • source
  • hideshow 5 child comments
  • [–] 20 points 7 months ago (4 children)

    People tried that, it failed. It's too volatile.

    It's basically a way for people to think they are being sneaky and shit when it's all trackable anyways.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
  • [–] 4 points 7 months ago (3 children)

    Is it though? Obviously bitcoin, eth, etc. Arent, but xmr and zec would be, no?

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [–] 3 points 7 months ago (1 child)

    To an extent it is but with enough resources and knowhow anything is traceable.

    It's not always about direct traceability it's the little bread crumbs that get left by everything. Nothing is absolute and everything we think is secure leaks like a mofo it's just a matter of translating the data.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 1 point 7 months ago

    True, a place like Iran could keep it untraceable, although they would have to take some extra care in order to do so. But for your average person that's not being looked at by a nation state, it is much easier to remain untraceable.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 17 points 7 months ago (1 child)
  • [+] 11 points 7 months ago (4 children)
  • [–] [S] 35 points 7 months ago (4 children)

    People who say that crypto has no application are just thinking inside the imperial bubble.

  • source
  • hideshow 4 child comments
  • [–] 5 points 7 months ago

    Halal scamming.

  • source
  • [–] 4 points 7 months ago

    Do they accept Walmart gift cards?

  • source
  • [–] 4 points 7 months ago (10 children)

    Cool, now we can add global extortion to cryptocurrency benefits.

  • source
  • hideshow 10 child comments
  • [–] 3 points 7 months ago (9 children)

    it's a fucking toll you dingus those are iranian waters

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 9 child comments
  • [–] -1 points 7 months ago (8 children)

    No it's not it's an international trade route they're just being Pricks because anything to piss off maga

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 8 child comments
  • [–] 6 points 7 months ago* (5 children)

    Those iran's waters. These ships are literally passing through their country, I think you're confused with "territorial waters" as defined in UNCLOS as well but neither Iran nor the US nor pissrael ratified that treaty. Here is a good opinion on why the UNCLOS doesn't really apply

    https://www.simplelaw.blog/p/the-strait-of-hormuz-a-3-minute-international

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 5 child comments
  • [+] 0 points 7 months ago (4 children)
  • [–] 2 points 7 months ago* (3 children)

    yes

    Iran is right about which rules are universal (innocent passage, not transit passage). ... The U.S. is also not a party to UNCLOS.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [+] 1 point 7 months ago (2 children)
  • [–] 3 points 7 months ago*

    ** Iran is right about which rules are universal **

    I don't know how much clearer it gets??? Who's gonna argue that UNCLOS is universal anyway? The US or pissrael? Neither of which are party to the UNCLOS and who very much assert authority outside their territorial waters?

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 1 point 7 months ago

    International law has no meaning if nations don't participate.

    For example, the United States has laws and policies designed to prevent the arrest of U.S. personnel and its allies by the International Criminal Court (ICC). The 2002 American Service-Members' Protection Act (ASPA) authorizes the US President to use "all means necessary and appropriate" to release U.S. or allied personnel detained by the ICC, often termed the "Hague Invasion Act".

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 1 point 7 months ago (1 child)
  • [–] 1 point 7 months ago
    [+] -6 points 7 months ago (1 child)

    A million a ship on avg, high sea piracy is back.

    3 to 8 ships have paid in last 72hrs. Normally 320-600ships would have gone thru for free in that window.

  • source
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 14 points 7 months ago

    I mean... this happened after an illegal war, with probably hundreds of war crimes committed to Iran and hundreds of thousands from israel/US in totality across the region.

    This toll is nothing in comparison to that and I prefer this as Iran's form of retaliation compared to more killing.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] -1 points 7 months ago

    Preferred crypto payment is USDT (Thether) stable coin. Which is the least US regulated, and most popular, US $ equivalent/backed stable coin. They are unlikely to refuse bitcoin, though.

  • source
  • 5 comments in c/technology@lemmy.ml view that post