There is no new boss YET

比推Publicado a 2026-03-05Actualizado a 2026-03-05

Resumen

An Iranian deputy military commander from a southern district stated that the Strait of Hormuz has not been blockaded, but only vessels from the U.S. and Israel are prohibited from passing through. This caused a sharp, temporary drop in market prices for oil, gas, and container shipping routes (except European shipping, which remained down). The statement contrasts with Spain's recent refusal to allow the U.S. to use its bases for operations against Iran, where a spokesperson grimly warned of rising energy prices. Around the same time, a U.S. oil tanker sank in the Strait of Hormuz after reportedly “hitting a reef”—a claim viewed by some as corroboration of Iran’s military reports suggesting it was struck by a missile. The information landscape is filled with conflicting narratives, and all claims may be considered both true and false depending on perspective, as psychological and media operations are integral to modern warfare. There is no single authoritative voice in this conflict; even figures like Trump have contributed to the confusion with performative statements. Amid the chaos, all sides are maneuvering for strategic advantage, while humanitarian concerns are overshadowed by geopolitical games. The situation reflects a self-destructive struggle on a global scale.

Just now, uh, a deputy commander of a military district in southern Iran said something: 'We have not blocked the Strait of Hormuz,' only prohibiting ships from the US and Israel from passing. This instantly scared the market into a slide, things like European shipping, oil, gas. Scared the hell out of them, a complete mess, but at this moment, most have deeply V-recovered [except for European shipping].

This is in stark contrast to the Spanish spokesperson who, with a grave expression [at a press conference announcing Spain's refusal to negotiate with the US and allow the use of Spanish bases to attack Iran], repeatedly stated that oil and gas prices are bound to rise.

At the moment of speaking, a US oil tanker 'ran aground' and sank in the Strait of Hormuz. Think about it, 'running aground' in the world's busiest energy transport artery. This actually verifies the Iranian military's combat report. It was sunk by a missile.

Some might say, with so many messages and news, which one is true? Who is fooling whom? Actually, all can be considered true (truth mixed with falsehood, falsehood mixed with truth, remember all is fair in war.), because there is no leading figure or authority now [even if there is, like Trump giving himself a 15 out of 10 (evaluating US-Iran actions at a press conference, scoring himself, full marks 10.), it would be full of drama, and the war of public opinion has always been synchronized with the overall war and runs through it from beginning to end.]. The information released by all parties at any given moment can be considered true, but viewed from the overall situation or different standpoints, it can also be considered false. 'Everyone' is searching for the kind of 'ladder' Littlefinger talked about in the chaos, collecting as many chips as possible.

As for humanity, as for compassion. Amidst the complex and numerous coercions, there is temporarily no place for them to stand. This is the self-inflicted disaster of a group of microorganisms on this planet.

Whatever, bro.

#KingOfWar#King of War

Original article link:https://www.bitpush.news/articles/7617058

Preguntas relacionadas

QWhat was the immediate market reaction to the Iranian commander's statement about not blocking the Strait of Hormuz?

AThe market was instantly frightened, causing a sharp decline in prices for routes like European container shipping, oil, and gas. However, these prices mostly experienced a deep V-shaped recovery shortly after, except for European container shipping.

QHow did the Spanish spokesperson's statement contrast with the Iranian commander's?

AThe Spanish spokesperson, with a grave expression, repeatedly stated that oil and gas prices would inevitably rise during a press conference where Spain refused to negotiate with the U.S. on using its bases to attack Iran. This formed a sharp contrast to the Iranian commander's statement that they were not blocking the strait but only banning U.S. and Israeli ships.

QWhat incident is reported to have occurred in the Strait of Hormuz that seemingly confirmed Iran's military report?

AA U.S. oil tanker was reported to have 'run aground' and sunk in the Strait of Hormuz. The article suggests this was a cover story and that the tanker was actually sunk by a missile, validating Iran's military claims.

QAccording to the article, why is it difficult to determine the truth from the various news and messages circulating?

AThe article states that all information released by various parties can be considered true at the moment it is given, but when viewed from an overall perspective or different standpoints, it can also be considered false. There is no single authoritative source, and information warfare is full of deception and drama, making it hard to discern the absolute truth.

QWhat is the overall tone of the article towards the geopolitical situation described?

AThe tone is cynical and pessimistic, describing the situation as a chaotic melee where parties are fighting for leverage, with humanity and compassion having no place. It concludes with a resigned 'so be it' attitude, referring to the conflict as the自作孽 (self-inflicted disaster) of the planet's microbes.

Lecturas Relacionadas

a16z: AI's 'Amnesia', Can Continuous Learning Cure It?

The article "a16z: AI's 'Amnesia' – Can Continual Learning Cure It?" explores the limitations of current large language models (LLMs), which, like the protagonist in the film *Memento*, are trapped in a perpetual present—unable to form new memories after training. While methods like in-context learning (ICL), retrieval-augmented generation (RAG), and external scaffolding (e.g., chat history, prompts) provide temporary solutions, they fail to enable true internalization of new knowledge. The authors argue that compression—the core of learning during training—is halted at deployment, preventing models from generalizing, discovering novel solutions (e.g., mathematical proofs), or handling adversarial scenarios. The piece introduces *continual learning* as a critical research direction to address this, categorizing approaches into three paths: 1. **Context**: Scaling external memory via longer context windows, multi-agent systems, and smarter retrieval. 2. **Modules**: Using pluggable adapters or external memory layers for specialization without full retraining. 3. **Weights**: Enabling parameter updates through sparse training, test-time training, meta-learning, distillation, and reinforcement learning from feedback. Challenges include catastrophic forgetting, safety risks, and auditability, but overcoming these could unlock models that learn iteratively from experience. The conclusion emphasizes that while context-based methods are effective, true breakthroughs require models to compress new information into weights post-deployment, moving from mere retrieval to genuine learning.

marsbitHace 2 hora(s)

a16z: AI's 'Amnesia', Can Continuous Learning Cure It?

marsbitHace 2 hora(s)

Can a Hair Dryer Earn $34,000? Deciphering the Reflexivity Paradox in Prediction Markets

An individual manipulated a weather sensor at Paris Charles de Gaulle Airport with a portable heat source, causing a Polymarket weather market to settle at 22°C and earning $34,000. This incident highlights a fundamental issue in prediction markets: when a market aims to reflect reality, it also incentivizes participants to influence that reality. Prediction markets operate on two layers: platform rules (what outcome counts as a win) and data sources (what actually happened). While most focus on rules, the real vulnerability lies in the data source. If reality is recorded through a specific source, influencing that source directly affects market settlement. The article categorizes markets by their vulnerability: 1. **Single-point physical data sources** (e.g., weather stations): Easily manipulated through physical interference. 2. **Insider information markets** (e.g., MrBeast video details): Insiders like team members use non-public information to trade. Kalshi fined a剪辑师 $20,000 for insider trading. 3. **Actor-manipulated markets** (e.g., Andrew Tate’s tweet counts): The subject of the market can control the outcome. Evidence suggests Tate’sociated accounts coordinated to profit. 4. **Individual-action markets** (e.g., WNBA disruptions): A single person can execute an event to profit from their pre-placed bets. Kalshi and Polymarket handle these issues differently. Kalshi enforces strict KYC, publicly penalizes insider trading, and reports to regulators. Polymarket, with its anonymous wallet-based system, has historically been more permissive, arguing that insider information improves market accuracy. However, it cooperated with authorities in the "Van Dyke case," where a user traded on classified government information. The core paradox is reflexivity: prediction markets are designed to discover truth, but their financial incentives can distort reality. The more valuable a prediction becomes, the more likely participants are to influence the event itself. The market ceases to be a mirror of reality and instead shapes it.

marsbitHace 3 hora(s)

Can a Hair Dryer Earn $34,000? Deciphering the Reflexivity Paradox in Prediction Markets

marsbitHace 3 hora(s)

Trading

Spot
Futuros
活动图片