I don't have any groundbreaking info here.
Think about it. The fact that we are relying on a public information with a twist to be secure is not the answer.

LET'S DISCUSS. I was just thinking and all of a sudden realized that this concept is a ticking TIMEBOMB!!

I feel an attack, though it may not happen today or tomorrow, is:

 DEFINITION :Imminent, Impending, Threatening all may carry the implication of menace, misfortune, disaster, but they do so in differing degrees.

Someone is going to figure it out.
They may not be there yet, but tell me how all the info being PUBLIC won't eventually be cracked?

This is NOT fud.
And yes, I could be wrong.
But think about it for a minute. USE you deductive skills here.

BCX may have been bluffing. But why was his bluff taken so seriously? Because he has killed coins before. That is some of it.

But that is what got me thinking.

Why are most anon technologies not "on the chain"?
Why are the most respected and talented developers not choosing to have the "on chain anon"?

Jl777, The most famous as of late, but look at all the other coins, Sonic (SSD), another highly regarded developer, and the list goes on and on.

We all are here for the potential of decentralization, but having an anon technology "on chain" doesn't make it anymore decentralized than the LARGE MAJORITY of the rest of the coins with anon tech that use a mixture of different techniques to accomplish this same goal.

If it is done in a way that is not going though ONE server that can be taken down, or ONE company doing it using a "classic mixer", then "on chain anon" is in no way any more decentralized than all the rest of the anon coins.

Think about this, REAL HARD, because, you know what, I'm right folks.

But I made this topic to have this dicussion, and it is only moderated to keep the popular trolls out, I actually WANT to hear people playing the devils advocate here. This is the whole point of the topic. So don't worry, your posts are welcome and encouraged.