> * the fact that 20% of the block reward is given to the founders as a "fee". i.e. 6 people will end up with 20% of a "global currency". This applied to the f

> * the fact that 20% of the block reward is given to the founders as a "fee". i.e. 6 people will end up with 20% of a "global currency". This applied to the first 4 years of issuance, so it's actually only 10% of the total supply, and it went to not just founders but also advisors, investors, etc, and some was donated to the Zcash foundation, so the portion that was personal profit for 6 people was much smaller! The bulk went into... paying salaries for quite a lot of developers. Since then another dev reward was agreed on (for the next 4 years), but this is going directly to the company+foundation directly building Zcash with no "founder share". TLDR: the share of the Zcash supply of which "6 people" are receiving through in-protocol issuance is much smaller than 20%. > * the fact that it's a "privacy focused" crypto-currency and the CEO said "we can make it private, but not for criminals" i.e. backdoored. (https://twitter.com/zooko/status/863202798883577856?s=20 https://twitter.com/zooko/status/863202798883577856?s=20) Zooko did NOT mean backdoors; he meant things like KYC at exchanges and giving people the ability to voluntarily give "viewing keys" to law enforcement that prove which transactions they actually send/received. See some follow up tweets: https://twitter.com/zooko/status/863516385426755585 https://twitter.com/zooko/status/863516385426755585 https://twitter.com/zooko/status/864342017605750784 https://twitter.com/zooko/status/864342017605750784 > * the fact it's a crypto-currency with a CEO. Fair point! Zcash governance is definitely more centralized in that way (though there is a lot of community engagement, as we saw in the [dev fund extension](https://electriccoin.co/reaching-consensus/ https://electriccoin.co/reaching-consensus/)). We'll see how it evolves. > * the fact that the ZK-SNARKs they use (however mathematically beautiful), requires a trusted setup, i.e. prover key(non I/O) Also a valid point, though this is a big part of why they have been working on Halo, a ZK scheme which does not require trusted setups and still has the benefits of succinct proofs etc. > * the fact the SNARKS are computationally expensive and no-one uses them. Thus opt in privacy and reduced anonymity set. These days you only need a few seconds to make a SNARK, even on a phone! But the "opt in privacy" thing is definitely a fair point; I hope that they can escape their bitcoin roots somewhat and get rid of transparent addresses and Script and that whole mess entirely at some point, but we'll see.