There is no new boss YET

比推Publicado em 2026-03-05Última atualização em 2026-03-05

Resumo

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

Perguntas 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.

Leituras Relacionadas

How Difficult is Chip Making? A Division Error Costs 475 Million Dollars

How Hard Is It to Make a Chip? A Division Error Cost $475 Million Chip expert Shi Kan, a researcher at the Chinese Academy of Sciences and a popular tech creator, explains the immense challenges of chip development. Chips are foundational to modern technology, but their creation is extraordinarily difficult. The journey from sand to a functional chip involves complex design and manufacturing, but a critical bottleneck is verification—ensuring the design works flawlessly before costly production. A single, undetected bug can have catastrophic consequences, as illustrated by the infamous 1994 Intel Pentium FDIV bug. A flaw in the floating-point division unit forced a recall costing $475 million. Unlike software, chips cannot be easily patched after manufacture, making "first-time success" paramount. However, industry surveys show only 24% of chip projects achieve this; over three-quarters require at least one costly re-spin due to design flaws. Verification has thus become the dominant phase, consuming up to 70% of the design cycle. The core challenge is a "verification impossible triangle" between high performance, good debuggability, and low cost. Exhaustively verifying a modern CPU core could take 15,000 years with software simulation, or 30 years with advanced hardware emulation—timeframes utterly impractical for development. Despite being essential, verification is often seen as unglamorous "dirty work," receiving less academic attention than fields like AI. Shi and his team are tackling this by developing an agile verification research framework called ENCORE, based on FPGA technology, to improve verification efficiency and debug capability. Beyond research, Shi engages in public science communication through long-form video content, aiming to demystify chip technology, AI, and computer science. He argues for the value of pursuing "hard and long-term" endeavors, whether in the meticulous world of chip verification or in creating substantive educational content, believing such sustained effort is likely the right path forward.

marsbitHá 10m

How Difficult is Chip Making? A Division Error Costs 475 Million Dollars

marsbitHá 10m

Blockchain Has Finally Started to Sail into the Mainstream After 18 Years

Blockchain Finds Its True Path After 18 Years: Becoming the Financial Backbone for AI Agents and Autonomy This analysis explores a pivotal shift in the blockchain and crypto investment landscape, driven by the dominance of AI. Major venture capital firms, including Variant, Paradigm, Haun Ventures, and YZi Labs, are moving beyond pure "crypto" investment theses. They are expanding their focus to AI, robotics, and frontier tech, signaling that blockchain is no longer seen as a standalone sector but as an underlying infrastructure layer. The core argument is that blockchain's killer application may not be user-facing apps, but rather providing the economic rails for the coming wave of AI agents, autonomous robots, and automated systems. Key capabilities like self-custody wallets, programmable stablecoins for micropayments, on-chain identity, and verifiable smart contracts are positioned as essential for a future where machines conduct economic activity. The recent $1.4 billion investment by Tether (via its venture arm) in German robotics company NEURA Robotics exemplifies this, aiming to embed Tether's wallet tools directly into robots for autonomous transactions. While many "AI + Crypto" projects remain superficial, the article concludes that true value lies where crypto is a necessary component—enabling machine-to-machine payments, agent autonomy, verifiable data provenance, and open financial settlement for the AI era. For crypto venture capital, this convergence with AI represents both an adaptation to shifting capital flows and a potential path to unlocking the large-scale, non-speculative utility the industry has long sought.

marsbitHá 31m

Blockchain Has Finally Started to Sail into the Mainstream After 18 Years

marsbitHá 31m

Blockchain has finally begun sailing toward the main channel after 18 years

After 18 years of development, blockchain technology is beginning to move from a specialized niche into mainstream adoption, according to a recent industry analysis. The shift is reflected in the changing strategies of major crypto venture capital firms, which are expanding their focus beyond pure "digital ownership" towards broader themes like "autonomy." The report highlights that leading VC firms like Variant, Paradigm, Haun Ventures, and YZi Labs are broadening their investment mandates to include not only crypto but also artificial intelligence (AI), robotics, biotech, and other frontier technologies. This reflects a recognition that the isolated "crypto investment" narrative is losing appeal to limited partners (LPs) as capital and attention increasingly flow toward AI and other high-growth tech sectors. A key emerging thesis is that blockchain's most significant future application may not be as a consumer-facing product, but as the underlying economic and settlement infrastructure for the AI era. As AI agents and autonomous systems become more prevalent, they will require programmable, global, and low-cost payment networks (like stablecoins), verifiable digital identities, and secure wallets to manage transactions and assets on behalf of users. The investment by stablecoin issuer Tether into robotics company NEURA, with plans to integrate its wallet technology, is cited as a prime example of this convergence. However, the article cautions that simply labeling projects as "AI + Crypto" is insufficient. True value lies in integrations where blockchain technology is essential—such as enabling machine-to-machine micropayments, verifiable data provenance for AI, or transparent governance for autonomous organizations—rather than being a superficial marketing add-on. In conclusion, while AI currently dominates the tech narrative and capital flows, it may ultimately create the real-world, high-frequency demand that the crypto industry has long sought. For crypto VCs and projects, the path forward is to position blockchain not as a competing sector, but as a critical foundational layer powering autonomy and economic activity in an AI-driven future.

链捕手Há 37m

Blockchain has finally begun sailing toward the main channel after 18 years

链捕手Há 37m

Y Combinator Co-founder: How to Make a Billion Dollars?

The Y Combinator co-founder argues that becoming a billionaire by founding a successful startup is not only possible but demonstrably achievable without unfair or unethical practices. He disputes a politician's claim to the contrary, using the example of a founder whose company grew at 93% monthly solely through creating a product users loved and recommended. The core mechanism is exponential growth. A conservative 15% monthly growth rate compounds to a 4384x increase over five years, which can easily lead to billion-dollar valuations and founder wealth. The process depends on two key variables: the growth rate and the duration it can be sustained. A high growth rate stems from a great product that users naturally promote, while a long duration requires a large enough market. For aspiring founders, especially young ones, the simplest path is to build something they and their friends genuinely need. Young people's current needs often predict future mass-market trends. He advises against actively "searching" for ideas, as this tends to filter out unconventional but promising ones. Instead, inspiration should come from working on interesting projects with friends, as many iconic companies (e.g., Apple, Facebook) started this way. Ultimately, building a massively valuable startup is not about exploitation but empathy: deeply understanding a user group and building a product that significantly improves their lives. This, powered by exponential growth in a large market, is the legitimate path to immense wealth creation.

Foresight NewsHá 40m

Y Combinator Co-founder: How to Make a Billion Dollars?

Foresight NewsHá 40m

Trading

Spot
Futuros
活动图片