Are you factoring the current size of Monero VS Bitcoin? (mining difficulty would increase, so attack difficulty would increase as well if Monero was of similar size)

Why have they not attacked Monero?

Is it because it is too small to be on their radar?

Is it not worth diverting resources away from their current intended purposes?

When it becomes a big enough threat to finally consider attacking will the hashpower be larger and more challenging to attack then? (Monero is a fraction of Bitcoins size)

With Monero the lower barrier to be able to participate in mining also allows for more decentralization (at least in theory)

I think ASIC and ASIC-resistant PoW both have their own unique downsides and upsides. ASIC is harder to attack, but once an attack is underway it is harder to recruit new honest hash to push back. The opposite is true of RandomX.

Other ASIC-resistant advantages: ASICs centralize and make good targets in several ways.

-Much more discrete (power draw, heat, noise)

-General CPU purchases mean you blend in VS buying an ASIC. Everyone knows what you're going to do with that ASIC.

-Large concentrated mining farms are easy to co-opt and regulate for governments.

-Over half the hashpower now requires KYC

-No P2pool. Stratumv2 helps but isn't sufficient. Large pool operators control payout so are targets for governments.