FreedmanCrypto[互关版]

While waiting in line for the elevator, I glanced at my phone and saw a message that stunned me—today is May 22, Bitcoin Pizza Day. 16 years ago today, a programmer named Laszlo Hanyecz spent 10,000 BTC to buy two pizzas. At that time, one BTC was worth less than a dime, and the two pizzas cost about $41. Today, BTC is priced at $76,792, so those two pizzas would be worth $768 million at today's price. Every year on this day, the crypto community brings up this story again. But the atmosphere feels a bit different this year. Last Pizza Day, BTC was higher than it is now, and these two pizzas have "shrunk" in value by over $300 million. Yahoo Finance’s headline was painfully accurate: Lighter Than Last Year. Honestly, the reason Laszlo’s story is retold every year isn’t because he lost money, but because he did something that seemed meaningless at the time but now looks earth-shattering. He gave BTC its first "price"—not from exchange charts, but from a real person exchanging virtual currency for a real thing. Without those two pizzas, BTC might have remained just an experiment in geek forums. With those two pizzas, it began to become "money." Today, BTC is hovering around 77,000, ETF funds are flowing out, while XRP and SOL ETFs are actually attracting capital. The market is rotating, sentiment is swinging. But every May 22, everyone still remembers those two pizzas. It reminds us of one thing: the most valuable thing in this market is never how much you made today, but what you did when most people didn’t understand. Do you have any "if only I hadn’t sold back then" experiences? Come chat in the comments. It’s Pizza Day today, let’s confess together 🍕

Habitually checked my holdings before bed, $BTC is still hovering around $76,700, I was about to shut down and sleep. Then I came across a message that woke me up immediately—Truth Social, Trump's own social platform, just withdrew all BTC ETF, ETH ETF, and blue-chip crypto ETF applications from the SEC. You read that right, withdrew. The person who has been shouting "crypto is the future" on social media, his own company quietly pulled the ETF application documents. Not postponed, not modified, but directly withdrawn. What’s even more painful is that Trump Media moved another $205 million into BTC in the past two weeks, but the book loss has already expanded to $455 million. Meanwhile, BTC ETFs saw nearly $1 billion in net outflows within two days. I tend to see this as a signal—not that Trump has completely given up on crypto, but when your own ETF applications can’t get through, it means the regulatory environment is more complicated than we thought. At the beginning of the year, everyone was fantasizing about "crypto president" coming to power and BTC ETFs flourishing everywhere. Looking back now, institutional funds are voting with their feet. Nearly $1 billion net outflow from ETFs in the past two days, it’s not retail investors selling off, it’s big money pulling out. At this stage, $BTC’s short-term support is around $76,000. Whether this level holds if ETF funds continue to flow out remains to be seen. But I don’t think this is a crash signal; it’s more like a correction of expectations—people overestimated the "policy benefits" too much. What’s really worth watching is the ETF subscription and redemption data in the coming week. If net outflows expand from $1 billion to $2 billion, short-term sentiment will worsen further. If it stabilizes, it means this wave was just a panic sell-off. Do you think Truth Social withdrawing the ETF applications will change your outlook for the market in the second half of the year?

I habitually checked the market before bed; BTC has been stuck around 77,000 for several days, with intraday volatility less than 2,000 dollars, which is indeed quite dull. But interestingly, altcoins are quietly stirring. BONK rose over 3% today, TRUMP quietly pulled up nearly 5%, and both SUI and PEPE are up more than 1.6%. The main market is stagnant, but the smaller players are moving first—this rhythm actually feels quite familiar. My judgment is that during BTC's sideways consolidation, funds are rotating from BTC to altcoins. On-chain data also shows some signs; retail and short-term funds prefer to bet on assets with higher volatility. After all, when BTC is stagnant, the percentage returns on altcoins are indeed more tempting. But don’t get too carried away. Altcoin rotation and an altcoin season are two different things. A true altcoin season requires BTC to hold steady above key support levels, while ETH also keeps pace. Currently, ETH’s increase is only 0.4%, clearly not yet the time for a full takeoff. If BTC can hold the 76,000 support and ETH starts to catch up, then an altcoin rally might really be coming. Conversely, if BTC suddenly drops sharply, altcoins will fall even harder. Which altcoins did you add to your position today? Let’s chat in the comments 👇

Scrolling through my phone during lunch break, I came across an analysis that surprised me a bit. Standard Chartered Bank previously publicly dissed Solana, saying it was "stuck in meme coin mode and can't get out," claiming this situation was seriously harming SOL's development. At the time, many people thought that made sense, after all, the chain was flooded daily with various animal coins and junk tokens driving up transaction volumes. But recently, the tone has shifted dramatically. Major banks have started pouring money into the Solana ecosystem, with billions of dollars flowing in, and it's definitely not following the meme coin path. The monthly transaction volume of stablecoins on Solana has already surged to $650 billion, a figure unimaginable just a year ago. Even more outrageous, some analysts are boldly predicting SOL could increase 20 times from its current position. With the current price around $87, 20 times would be close to $1800. Is this prediction aggressive? Absolutely. But if you look at the on-chain data, institutions are indeed voting with their feet. BTC has been hovering around 77,300 for almost a week, and ETH is stuck at 2,129. When the market lacks direction, smart money never stays idle—they quietly position themselves for the next narrative. From a "meme chain" to an "institutional chain," Solana is undergoing an identity transformation. Interestingly, when Standard Chartered made that comment, what was SOL's price? It's $87 now—check for yourself how much it has risen since then. How do you think those who sold SOL after listening to Standard Chartered feel now? Do you think Solana is truly shedding its meme label, or are institutions just giving a casino a new name?

Last night I was jolted awake by a phone notification with the headline "Quantum computer cracked a simplified Bitcoin key." Honestly, my first reaction was clickbait. But after opening it, I found it was a serious report from Decrypt, and Glassnode's data was even more alarming—nearly $500 billion worth of Bitcoin is exposed to future quantum computing attacks, with about 1.92 million BTC addresses having quantum vulnerabilities. Citi's report was even more unsettling: Bitcoin's exposure to quantum risk is higher than Ethereum's. Coinbase's advisory board also stated that the threat is already on the horizon, and the crypto industry needs a plan. Right now, BTC is hovering around 77,200, ETH at 2,122, and the market already lacks direction, suddenly adding another layer of underlying security anxiety. Although the real "Q-Day" might still be years away, Project Eleven's report says Bitcoin's quantum migration might already be too late. Interestingly, there is a new BIP proposal recently that offers Satoshi Nakamoto a way to prove control without moving BTC. This shows developers are already taking action, but whether the pace can outrun quantum computing progress is uncertain. Most people won't delve into the technical details, but the thought that "the coins in your wallet might one day no longer be safe" is enough to keep someone scrolling their phone at midnight awake. Do you think quantum computing poses a distant threat or an immediate concern to cryptocurrencies?

Just got off the treadmill, still wiping sweat with a towel when I saw a notification — Bank of America disclosed $53 million in crypto ETF holdings. Wait, BofA? That traditional big bank that used to avoid cryptocurrencies like the plague? Looking closer, the holdings cover BTC, XRP, ETH, SOL — all four major cryptos are bought. Even more interesting, on the same day Goldman Sachs was reducing its ETF positions in XRP and SOL. One is entering, the other is exiting; Wall Street’s attitude toward crypto has never been unified. But this precisely shows one thing: institutional money is no longer about "whether to allocate to crypto," but rather "how much and how to allocate." BofA daring to disclose this in their annual report indicates the compliance framework is now in place. Goldman’s reduction might just be portfolio rebalancing, not necessarily bearish. For retail investors, institutional moves are always lagging. By the time you see news that BofA bought in, they’ve already completed their positions. The real signal is: even the most conservative banks are moving, meaning the fundamental logic of this market has changed. $BTC is now around 77,200, neither rising nor falling, but there’s an undercurrent stirring. Do you think the banks entering is a sign that the good news is fully priced in, or the prelude to a new market rally?

I just saw a piece of news on my Moments feed, and after reading it, I felt pretty unsettled. The wife of a Sandbox executive was kidnapped, and after the kidnappers succeeded, they actually called an Uber to escape. You read that right, a ride-hailing app. This isn’t a movie plot; it’s a real "wrench attack" happening in the crypto world. A recent report from CertiK shows that these criminal gangs usually consist of 3 to 5 people, mostly amateurs, with the real masterminds often controlling things remotely from abroad. To put it bluntly, these people don’t hack your blockchain or steal your private keys—they physically threaten you directly. Once on-chain assets are moved, they’re almost impossible to trace, making this method far more efficient than robbing a bank. Many early players have shown off their holdings and faces on social media, essentially handing criminals a "prey list." When we usually talk about security, it’s about mnemonic phrases, cold wallets, 2FA, but the easiest vulnerability might be our own mouths. How many people have bragged about their crypto earnings at dinners or on social media? Honestly, after reading this news, I quietly deleted a holding screenshot I posted a few days ago. Have you ever talked about your crypto trading experiences in public? Next time, it’s better to keep a low profile. What do you think about these offline security issues? Share your prevention experiences in the comments.

Playing with my kid downstairs in the community, I took a quick glance at the market during his slide break. $BTC is still hovering around 77,400. Honestly, it’s been stuck at this level for almost a week. Every morning when I open the K-line chart, it feels like copy-paste—neither going up nor down. But I actually find this sideways movement more torturous than a crash. A crash at least is a sharp, decisive cut; sideways trading is like a dull knife slowly cutting your flesh, wearing down your judgment bit by bit every day. You want to bottom-fish but fear a breakdown; you want to exit but fear missing the rally. Looking at on-chain data recently, large transfers haven’t stopped; whales have been active all along. Retail investors keep moving in and out around 77K, paying plenty in fees, but the real winners are those who stay put. Institutions aren’t idle either; ETF funds flow in and out like tides, indicating smart money is also waiting for direction. The market isn’t lacking money, it’s lacking a catalyst. My current strategy is to watch the market less and spend more time with my kid. The breakthrough that’s coming won’t arrive any faster just because you’re staring at the screen. Instead of stressing, it’s better to manage your position size, set stop-loss and take-profit levels, and leave the rest to time. Lately, are you choosing to stay put and wait for the breakout, or can’t resist repeatedly trading?

A friend just sent me a message saying that bipartisan members of the US Congress have teamed up for a major move again. This time it's the ARMA Act, with a very clear goal: to upgrade the BTC strategic reserve from a presidential executive order to formal legislation. An executive order can be revoked by the next president, but once it's written into law, that's a true long-term commitment. When Trump signed the executive order to establish the strategic reserve in March this year, the market already reacted strongly. Now, Congress members feel that's not enough and want to lock it in through legislation. Behind this is the crypto industry's continuous lobbying efforts, from PAC donations to direct lobbying on Capitol Hill; these actions over the past few years are finally starting to yield substantial results. If this bill really passes, it means the US government will become a permanent holder of BTC at the legal level. There will be no selling pressure, no policy uncertainty. From a supply and demand perspective, the largest potential seller will directly exit the market, which structurally supports the price. Of course, the legislative process is still long, with both the House and Senate needing to approve it, so there are many variables. But interestingly, even Democratic members have started to participate, which shows that crypto is no longer a matter of just one party. When both parties are competing for crypto votes, the big picture is actually quite clear. BTC is currently around $77,357, just a step away from $80,000. If the ARMA Act makes any substantial progress soon, $80K could come faster than many expect. Even if the bill is temporarily shelved, the mere fact that "the US Congress is seriously discussing the BTC strategic reserve" is already a bull market signal. Do you think this is real legislation or just another round of political showmanship? $BTC

Just took a break and checked my phone, the news is quite explosive——Blockchain.com has secretly submitted IPO documents to the SEC, preparing to list on Nasdaq. This exchange was founded in 2012, has been around for 14 years, and is valued at $7 billion. CoinDesk, Bloomberg, and Reuters have all confirmed this simultaneously; it's not a rumor. Interestingly, Kraken and Ledger recently both paused their IPO plans, and the overall market is actually quite cold. Blockchain.com is choosing to push through against the trend at this time, either confident in its own cash flow or betting that the market window won't stay closed forever. In January this year, BitGo just raised $212.8 million to complete its listing, marking the first crypto IPO of 2026. Now Blockchain.com is taking over; if successful, it would be a strong boost for the entire industry. But there are risks—BTC is currently consolidating around 77,000, market sentiment is low, and institutional entry pace is slowing. Filing an S-1 in this environment means pricing and underwriting will be tough battles. What do you think about rushing an IPO at this time? Is it courage or recklessness?