They're just trolling the US. But if the US attacks and Iran again and Iran feels that the cables are vital to US military interests, they might destroy them. They have a right to: The cables cross the territory of the sovereign Iranian state.
I wasn't talking about rights, but about the incentive of network operators worldwide to prevent one another from paying unilateral fees. Of all sectors to weigh attacking, the networking sector seems like the worst sector to attack: they are well networked and a whole alliance of lucrative entities around the world becomes your enemy if you start applying unilateral fees.
Iran is in a vicious circle of generating self-fulfilling prophecies: persecution complex -> hostage politics -> more enemies -> persecution complex.
They show leadership on almost no front, they are not credible on a world stage. Try and picture some kind of future version of the current regime in Iran becoming a bigger and bigger world player, how will they start addressing real problems, like global warming? They only have experience in making their problems also someone else's problem. Suppose they continue and eventually achieve nuclear power status, will they blackmail the trees in the amazon rain forest to do photosynthesis faster, or else?
> The cables cross the territory of the sovereign Iranian state
The strait is not and has never been Iran's sovereign territory. Or should the UAE and Oman start trying to charge fees to ships trying to cross the strait too?
> The strait is not and has never been Iran's sovereign territory.
About half of it is, yes? Wikipedia has a nice map [1] which shows the agreed-upon maritime boundaries and there's also some disputed islands where there's no agreed up on boundaries listed. Wikipedia isn't absolutely correct, but where a body of water separates two sovereign states, the territorial waters tend to meet around the middle, with specific definition by treaty.
There's also a pretty detailed US state department report [2] on the boundaries in the Persian Gulf, Straight of Hormuz and Gulf of Oman that lines up with the wikipedia map by my eye.
I'm not sure if the TeleGeography [3] maps are supposed to be representative of where the cables are laid or more of a general picture idea like a subway map. Anyway, looking at the two maps at the same time, it seems like at least some of those cables are in Iranian territorial waters.
It would seem that, with care, new cables that don't land in Iran could be placed in the Persian Gulf and avoiding Iranian waters; although the Iranian waters in the Persian Gulf are quite a bit deeper, than waters on the other side; which is why the shipping lanes tend to be in Iranian waters. This reverses at the straight where the (depicted) lanes are in the deeper Omani waters.
> Or should the UAE and Oman start trying to charge fees to ships trying to cross the strait too?
Now seems like a good time to raise fees? Both countries have a chokepoint if Iran is going to play hardball.
Pretty much everyone agrees that 12 nautical miles is the edge of territorial waters; whether they're bound by the UNCLOS or not.
The UNCLOS Part II Section 2 Article 3 [1] states:
> Every State has the right to establish the breadth of its territorial sea up to a limit not exceeding 12 nautical miles, measured from baselines determined in accordance with this Convention.
It does not restrict this to member states or signatory states or etc. I don't know that the UNCLOS is binding on member states while operating in the territorial waters of non-member states, but I don't think there's a compelling reason to think territorial waters of non-members are limited to 3 nautical meters, given the consensus is territorial waters are 12 nautical meters.
> Iran passed its own law in 2003 claiming 12nm. They can only assert that claim through violence.
As a member state of the UN, they can assert a claim about territorial waters against another state at the International Court of Justice. It would seem to be a question of international law. If they were a member state of the UNCLOS, there are additional dispute resolution mechanisms available. Of course, violence is always an option for dispute resolution.
Certainly a ball peen hammer that could be encouraged to go rusty for scientific purposes. I wonder if it would work well enough striking a sheet of aluminum foil on a hard flat surface?
Hammer faces would work (def wear goggles!!!). Hit the face of the disposable one with a mixture of hydrogen peroxide, vinegar and salt and wait an hour.
These are projects designed to serve the US military in it's future wars against China and other "threats". Note that "other threats" includes the American citizenry. You'll be - probably already are - targets of continual AI propaganda and manipulation to keep you compliant and keep paying your taxes to support this waste.
Same way it always has for empires throughout history - expropriating land and resources from the weak and giving it to the strong. And of course, borrowing money to finance more looting and pillaging.
They aren't. Nobody in power is so dumb they haven't thought of this yet - the scary idea is that those people in power don't think this is a problem, which implies the normal folk like us are either on our own or actively exterminated.
If the billionaire class doesn't think they need taxes or a workforce then what does that look like? If the population goes from 8B to like 5K + robots for the drudgery then all the problems go away - no more war, no more climate change, no famine, no large logistics problems.
I continually worry that these people in power see the rest of us as a nuisance to optimize away.
- Certainly the current population level isn't needed to support the current number of billionaires. Isn't there about 1000 right now? I probably eat more than 2 or 3 of them.
- What happens in 100 years when the billionaires have kids and their kids have kids?
Yeah I don't think AI is required for above, it just pushes the question of what's going to happen if huge swaths of jobs go away. Parent asked who is going to pay taxes in that world. I'm simply saying there's a version of this where "they" don't care because there is no intention to keep the current social order of a large tax paying lower and middle class.
> Certainly the current population level isn't needed to support the current number of billionaires. Isn't there about 1000 right now? I probably eat more than 2 or 3 of them.
That's a good attitude, if we all set out to eat more than 2 or 3 billionaires they'll be in our stomachs and out of our hair before you know it!
Wow. I tried it on an old testing VM of Ubuntu 24.04 that had not been touched for a few months. Instant root with the bonus that any user that runs "su" gets root too.
I updated the VM thinking it would be fixed afterward. Nope.
