I said "seems" rather than just "is" mostly to be polite. In view of your response I am regretting that. I do not know what you mean by asking (I assume mostly

I said "seems" rather than just "is" mostly to be polite. In view of your response I am regretting that. I do not know what you mean by asking (I assume mostly rhetorically) "is that why they didn't 'mention' stopping all 'blockchains'?". Why the quotation marks and italics on "mention" and "blockchains"? Why should they have "mentioned stopping all blockchains"? So far as I can tell, they are not in fact arguing that all blockchains should be stopped. I didn't mean to (and do not intend to) get into a debate about whether in fact public blockchains are as bad for privacy as the open letter claims, or whether it's a bad thing if they are. My only point was: whatever you make of that issue, it is definitely one that doesn't apply to private blockchains, so it is not surprising that when bringing it up they did so specifically with reference to public blockchains, so the fact that they did that is not evidence of any sort of sinister motivation. How do you know that Adjoint-the-company has not shut down? (To be more precise, it looks to me as if the company is no longer functional even if it still exists as a legal entity. Note that your link [1] shows that the CEO has resigned (and shows no sign that another CEO has been appointed) and that Diehl is no longer a "person with significant control" (i.e., he no longer holds >= 25% of shares or voting rights) and in fact there are now no such people. This looks to me like a failed company in the process of being taken apart for scrap. If they are no longer offering a private blockchain product, how does that fit with your insinuations that their executives are trying to shut down public blockchains in order to give the private blockchain company they're associated with an advantage? My question about the "long utopian conquest" stuff was: what evidence do you have that these people are in fact aiming at any sort of "long utopian conquest"? So, indeed, if you think they want to ban all cryptocurrencies and projects, do you have actual evidence that they want that? Again, this open letter doesn't seem to offer any such evidence.