There is no new boss YET

比推Pubblicato 2026-03-05Pubblicato ultima volta 2026-03-05

Introduzione

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

Domande pertinenti

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.

Letture associate

Misjudged A-Shares: Resilience, Expectations, and Confidence

China's A-share market recently faced selling pressure, especially in tech sectors, initially triggered by a global tech sell-off that began in South Korea. However, the article argues this is a case of "mistaken injury" and highlights the market's underlying resilience. This resilience stems from three main pillars: **1) Tech Sector Fundamentals:** Unlike Korea's market dominated by a few memory chip stocks, China's tech sector is diversified across computing, communications, electronics, and semiconductors, supported by dual narratives of global AI supply chains and domestic substitution. Core areas like optical modules and fiber optics continue to show strong earnings growth. **2) "National Team" Support:** State-backed institutions and large corporations have made significant market purchases and announced buybacks, providing liquidity and signaling confidence. This is seen as a stabilizing policy signal, often associated with market bottoms. **3) Broader Market Pillars:** Other major sectors are showing endogenous recovery momentum. Consumer stocks benefit from stabilizing CPI and signs of sector recovery (e.g., liquor price hikes). Cyclical sectors like aluminum have high earnings, potential price increases due to tight supply, and low valuations. The financial sector offers stable dividends and low valuations. The conclusion is that the sell-off was driven by external contagion, not a collapse in fundamentals. With strong policy support and recovering momentum across key sectors, the A-share market possesses the toughness to regain stability.

marsbit26 min fa

Misjudged A-Shares: Resilience, Expectations, and Confidence

marsbit26 min fa

Quantum Computers Haven't Arrived Yet, but Satoshi's 1.1 Million Bitcoin Pose the First Problem

A zero-knowledge proof tool can help modern Bitcoin wallets migrate assets before quantum attacks in milliseconds. However, approximately 1.1 million bitcoins mined by Satoshi Nakamoto before 2012 are fundamentally unprotected by such solutions, as they reside in older P2PK addresses lacking the hierarchical structure required for this cryptographic rescue. This exposes a critical divide: post-2012 HD wallets can potentially "upgrade" signatures using tools like Project Eleven's, while early coins are cryptographically isolated. The community faces a political, not technical, dilemma with four contentious options: 1) Let quantum attackers seize the coins, risking market instability; 2) Hard fork to freeze vulnerable addresses, seen as violating property rights; 3) Implement extreme spending limits to slow any attack; 4) Redistribute "orphaned" coins, breaking immutability. Each solution threatens a core Bitcoin tenet. The market is already pricing in this governance risk, as evidenced by institutional divestment citing uncertainty. The true crisis isn't the arrival of quantum computing, but the community's inability to reconcile its foundational principles with an existential technological shift.

marsbit34 min fa

Quantum Computers Haven't Arrived Yet, but Satoshi's 1.1 Million Bitcoin Pose the First Problem

marsbit34 min fa

Where Will the Next Bull Market's Main Battlefield Be? The Answer Lies in These Two Types of Assets

Matt Hougan, Bitwise's CIO, identifies the fusion of traditional finance and on-chain finance as the core driver for the next crypto bull market. He expects this cycle, propelled by real-world utility and global finance adoption, to be the largest yet, centered on stablecoins, asset tokenization, 24/7 trading, instant settlement, and institutional DeFi growth. The article outlines two primary investment approaches tied to this trend. The first focuses on native crypto applications with strong revenues and sustainable tokenomics, exemplified by Hyperliquid (HYPE). Its Layer-1 chain is gaining significant trading volume from traditional assets like oil and equities. Its model of using 99% of revenues for token buybacks is a key strength. The second approach targets established traditional firms building at scale on crypto rails, like Robinhood. The launch of its Robinhood Chain, enabling global trading of tokenized stocks and DeFi activities, represents a major move towards this fusion. The author also notes other serious contenders like Coinbase, Figure, BlackRock, and JPMorgan. Ultimately, the thesis is that the most profound success will come when blockchain technology seamlessly integrates into finance, becoming invisible to end-users. Investors are advised to position ahead of this convergence.

Foresight News38 min fa

Where Will the Next Bull Market's Main Battlefield Be? The Answer Lies in These Two Types of Assets

Foresight News38 min fa

The Clarity Act's Journey Through Congress: The Thorny Path of Bipartisan Compromise in the U.S.

The U.S. Congress is struggling to advance the crypto market structure bill known as the Clarity Act, with bipartisan compromise proving difficult. Key hurdles include unresolved disputes over "yield" products and, more critically, the inclusion of strong ethics provisions for elected officials—a non-negotiable demand for many Democrats. While a compromise on yield was reached in May, securing only limited Democratic support in committee, the separate Senate Agriculture Committee version later passed with no Democratic votes due to the ethics impasse. As Republicans push for a full Senate vote in July, demands for ethics rules have expanded, and other contentious issues like developer protections and concerns from law enforcement and large banks further complicate negotiations. Despite consensus on the need for legislation, the path forward is unclear. Recent discussions between senators and White House officials aim to find acceptable ethics language. Some lawmakers question whether a compromise text can garner enough bipartisan support, with one Democrat stating the current proposal lacks the strong ethics provisions required for their vote. Potential short-term goals for the crypto community include symbolic Senate action before the August recess, a longer-term aim for passage by 2026, or establishing a detailed framework that addresses ethics and other compromises. The process remains arduous, relying on the traditional, vote-by-vote effort to build bipartisan support.

marsbit45 min fa

The Clarity Act's Journey Through Congress: The Thorny Path of Bipartisan Compromise in the U.S.

marsbit45 min fa

Are Kalshi and Polymarket Founders at Odds? This Business Rivalry Is More Brutal Than You Think

"The Rivalry Between Kalshi and Polymarket Founders Turns Bitter and Litigious" The intense feud between Tarek Mansour, CEO of Kalshi, and Shayne Coplan, founder of Polymarket, has escalated far beyond typical business competition into personal animosity and regulatory battles. Both lead billion-dollar prediction market platforms, but their approaches differ sharply. Kalshi positions itself as the compliant operator, securing U.S. regulatory approval before launching. In contrast, Polymarket initially operated offshore, allowing U.S. users to access its platform via VPN, which drew regulatory scrutiny. The conflict reached a peak in November 2024 when FBI agents raided Coplan's New York apartment. While Coplan publicly blamed political motives, his team privately suspected Kalshi was involved. According to sources, Kalshi's lawyers had previously reported Polymarket's operations to federal prosecutors, highlighting its accessibility to U.S. users despite a ban. This incident fueled mutual accusations and underhanded tactics, including social media smear campaigns and attempts to sabotage each other's major business deals. Their rivalry also played out in Washington, influencing regulatory debates. Kalshi actively lobbied against Polymarket's practices, framing them as illegal and unethical. Polymarket, after facing a CFTC fine and investigation, later acquired a licensed U.S. firm to launch a domestic app, regaining a foothold. Despite the hostility, both companies have seen massive growth, with combined trading volumes soaring. However, increased regulatory scrutiny, particularly around insider trading on Polymarket's platform, continues to pose challenges. The founders' deep-seated mutual disdain ensures their battle for market dominance remains as much a personal vendetta as a commercial one.

marsbit54 min fa

Are Kalshi and Polymarket Founders at Odds? This Business Rivalry Is More Brutal Than You Think

marsbit54 min fa

Trading

Spot