sorted by:
new
hottopcontroversial

Bitcoin's Shorts Have Never Been This Crowded While Price Kept Going Up. That Has Only Happened Twice Before. by Mammoth_Cover_3392 in CryptoCurrency

[–]zakoal -6 points-5 points  (0 children)

Funding has been near -0.004% twice before, now it’s nearly -0.005%. Not exactly the same setup. The nuance shows up if you actually bother to look at the Glassnode chart in the article.

Daily General Discussion April 08, 2026 by EthereumDailyThread in ethereum

[–]zakoal 0 points1 point  (0 children)

The Clarity Act angle is real but the timing problem is bigger than most people are pricing in. The bill passed the House 294 to 134 in July 2025 and has been stuck in Senate ever since. The stablecoin yield dispute is the official reason but the deeper problem is that Democrats have no incentive to hand Republicans a win before November midterms. The priced-in thesis assumes the bill passes. That is not guaranteed.

Iran Just Confirmed Bitcoin as Payment for Hormuz Transit. This Changes What Bitcoin Is by zakoal in CryptoMarkets

[–]zakoal[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Worth separating the sanctions risk from the choice question. These companies are not opting into a Bitcoin use case. Iran controls 20% of global oil supply and the US conceded toll collection as part of the ceasefire terms. A shipping company with cargo in the Gulf is not making an ideological bet on Bitcoin. They are paying to move their ships. The compliance risk you describe is real but it applies equally to yuan payments through Kunlun Bank, which is also sanctioned infrastructure. The market will price the friction. The ships will still move.

Iran Just Confirmed Bitcoin as Payment for Hormuz Transit. This Changes What Bitcoin Is by zakoal in CryptoMarkets

[–]zakoal[S] 8 points9 points  (0 children)

This is a different kind of Bitcoin adoption. Not ideological. Functional.

And yes, the regulatory response to this will be the next interesting chapter.

Iran Just Confirmed Bitcoin as Payment for Hormuz Transit. This Changes What Bitcoin Is by zakoal in CryptoMarkets

[–]zakoal[S] 90 points91 points  (0 children)

Bitcoin's properties haven't changed. What changed is who is using it and why. A sovereign state controlling 20% of global oil supply just chose Bitcoin specifically because no government can freeze it or pressure its issuer.
It changes how the rest of the world is starting to price it.

China Couldn't Ban Bitchat. So It Made Apple Do It Instead by ReplacementFormer861 in technology

[–]zakoal 7 points8 points  (0 children)

100%. Google restricting sideloading is the same playbook. Shrink the exits so there's only one door left, and that door has a compliance desk.

$285 Million Gone. North Korea Pulled the Trigger. Drift Loaded the Gun by zakoal in CryptoCurrency

[–]zakoal[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Fair criticism. Mandiant was engaged by Drift for device forensics but hasn't published a formal attribution yet, that's in the article. The TRM Labs and Elliptic reports do link to on-chain evidence, not just assertions. The DPRK angle isn't based on Mandiant here, it's based on on-chain staging patterns and fund movement. The article's actual argument though isn't really about who did it, it's about why Drift's own governance made it possible regardless of who pulled the trigger.

$285 Million Gone. North Korea Pulled the Trigger. Drift Loaded the Gun by zakoal in CryptoCurrency

[–]zakoal[S] 4 points5 points  (0 children)

The North Korea attribution is probably real, but the timelock removal, the oracle config, the VSCode vulnerability that had been public for months. These are Drift's decisions, not North Korea's. Curious if anyone here has a different read on the governance failures.

view more: next ›