Technology

83695 readers

3329 users here now

This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.

Our Rules

Follow the lemmy.world rules.
Only tech related news or articles.
Be excellent to each other!
Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
Politics threads may be removed.
No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
Only approved bots from the list below, this includes using AI responses and summaries. To ask if your bot can be added please contact a mod.
Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed
Accounts 7 days and younger will have their posts automatically removed.

Approved Bots

founded 2 years ago

MODERATORS

L3s@lemmy.world

enu@lemmy.world

technopagan@lemmy.world

L4s@lemmy.world

L3s@hackingne.ws

452

Iran Demands Bitcoin For Ships Passing Hormuz During Ceasefire (slashdot.org)

submitted 2 days ago* (last edited 2 days ago) by technocrit@lemmy.dbzer0.com to c/technology@lemmy.world

105 comments fedilink hide all child comments

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.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments

[–] echodot@feddit.uk 8 points 1 day ago (3 children)

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

[–] BoJackHorseman@lemmy.today 3 points 15 hours ago (1 children)

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

[–] echodot@feddit.uk 3 points 15 hours ago (1 children)

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

[–] BoJackHorseman@lemmy.today 3 points 14 hours ago (1 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.

[–] Samskara@sh.itjust.works 2 points 13 hours ago (1 children)

That’s not true. Customary international law also applies to states, that are not themselves members of a treaty. In the case of international maritime war and international humanitarian laws this is widely accepted as such.

[–] Dr_Del_Fuego@slrpnk.net 3 points 13 hours ago

Maybe that used to be the case but the USA does it different

[–] mathemachristian@lemmy.blahaj.zone 2 points 19 hours ago (1 children)

Which law?

[–] AlDente@sh.itjust.works 7 points 16 hours ago* (last edited 16 hours 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.

[–] VAK@lemmy.world 1 points 15 hours ago

There used to be hundreds of cases of charges for transit. Led to wars too.

[–] mathemachristian@lemmy.blahaj.zone 1 points 15 hours ago* (last edited 14 hours ago)

I thought they meant this law but wasn't sure. That treaty has not been ratified by the US, Pissrael and most importantly, Iran! So it doesn't apply and we are talking about a war where neither the invading nations nor the victim nation has signed it.

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

[–] x00z@lemmy.world 31 points 1 day ago

It's not like international law protected them in the first place.