Again. I don’t have a strong opinion on ZSAs. I feel l don’t have a dog on this fight. I certainly think that a stable-ish coin that would help Zcash adoption because volatily conspires against MoE use cases that are needed for growing the anonymity set. And if it’s implemented I will certainly use it. Also zBRL, zARS, zBOL, etc are good use cases for on/off ramps on developing countries. Although good brinding/DEX’ing could also suffice to provide such use cases. But it’s not that my soul will be crushed if ZSAs are not deployed on mainnet either.
That being said, I want to share this thought in an attempt to put some perpective to the scenarios and risks that ZSA detractors posting here. Something I’ve been thinking is that the Big Money capture scenarios that are exposed as arguments against ZSAs are possible today. Starting with mining hash power centralization, followed by token holdings concentration shown by Coinholder voting results that can probably pose risks on the future PoS side of the consensus are more pressing and real problems than the hypothetical ZSA catastrophic visions that ZSA detractors are arguing.
If “the powers that be” would like to destroy or capture Zcash, they wouldn’t need ZSAs to do it. They can do that perfectly fine today. That’s why I don’t think ZSA are the “troyan horse” some folks are trying push as narrative.
“Infinite money attacks” such as Circle or Tether wanting to destroy ZEC, can happen today. People worried about them may as well worry about these first.