[flagged]
The claim seems plausible enough that people are debating if it actually happened or not, and if it is sustainable to keep it up. That's a big difference to 51% attacks being merely theoretical (which implies that they are unrealistic in practice).
We have multiple private actors in multiple countries amassing compute and networking power for AI ambitions, each of whom could single-handedly pot most cryptocurrencies outside Bitcoin and Ethereum.
That said, something being possible isn’t the same as it being true. To my knowledge, no 51% attack of consequence has ever been launched.
As always, estimates of the credibility of someone dismissing the risks of what they are trying to sell should start at zero and not go very far.
Here's another one (and changing subject): point out that GrapheneOS, which is a privacy focused mobile OS, ONLY supports Pixel, which is a phone produced by Google whose interests are surveillance. People will tell you that your concerns are theoretical.
People just don't learn.
Google is also as far as I'm aware one of only two mainstream vendors, and the only one making flagship-tier devices, that reliably offers bootloader unlocking as a feature so you can install alternative operating systems without having to first crack the device.
Sure maybe the people with Google phone X but over time we should expect that Google will find a way to Y, because that's where its interests lie. (And actually, we've seen it do exactly this many times. Chrome being the most obvious example).
Here's yet another example. If voters can be bought by promising them money, then we should expect that politicians will start promising money to voters in order to be elected.
Etc etc, do you see the pattern? My point wasn't actually about privacy, or Google, or Monero.
The Google-proprietary software is entirely replaced. Why the FUD?