Right. I get who the rest of the crypto-critics are whilst reading this 'letter' [0] and what they do, but interestingly at first glance I'm not quite sure who exactly the most prominent critics are and I especially mean the ones that are simply left blank like 'Darren W. Seng' and 'Stephen Diehl'. It turns out that they seem to be connected as C-level executives and co-founders of a private blockchain startup named 'Adjoint' [0] that appears to be in direct competition with public blockchains like Bitcoin, and especially Ethereum. It's quite strange to see why that wasn't mentioned?

Given that 'blockchain' is somehow the problem in the letter, why specifically 'public blockchains' [0] why not all blockchains both 'public' AND 'private'? Maybe there is a reason why they are attacking only public blockchains and somehow left out private ones? Another critic seems to attack both of them and doesn't see any difference to them at all. [2] So why did they leave that out in the letter if the blockchain is the problem?

Perhaps cryptocurrencies like Ethereum (which has smart-contract capabilities) and Bitcoin to some extent are the prime reason why the folks at Adjoint are eternally at odds with the crypto industry and are dedicated every single day to totally getting rid of all cryptocurrencies? Many have tried going down this path and Seng, and Diehl seem to have already deleted their repositories and associations [2] with Adjoint to pursue this terribly long utopian conquest.

After all, what on earth is 'nanocoin' and why was that deleted? [2]

[0] https://concerned.tech

[1] https://www.crunchbase.com/organization/adjoint-inc

[2] https://medium.com/@johny.codes/private-blockchains-even-wor...