> would adoption of RISC V help fix this issue?

If you're in the market for some slow CPU, maybe. For high performance stuff the creator will likely have to license some function blocks that come with strings attached.

I'd love to see a fully open RISC-V core with a DDR4 interface (and USB2/3 for all kinds of interfaces), but somehow I just don't see that happening before DDR4 is all but obsolete: those interfaces aren't trivial to build (so that they work with all kinds of stuff) and few folks have the equipment to test their Verilog (or whatever) that would implement these high speed controllers against real devices.

For my secure computer, yes please. I don't care how many extra milliseconds (or minutes) it takes to make a cryptocurrency transaction.

I do care that the in-memory key can not be read and transmitted without my OS' knowledge.

I have other computers for games and development and servers, and the NSA can have my steam password and already have my work email.

Not really. Closed firmware exists for reasons that aren't x86-specific so almost all ARM and RISC-V systems will have some form of closed firmware. One problem with x86 is that it's limited to ~3 companies while any company can use ARM or RISC-V so more diversity is possible.