Theoretically RingCT can be just as good as shielded Zcash in terms of anonymity set per transaction. It's just not practical to do though.
Discussion
You mean having a massive ring size?
You don't need that to have a better anonimity set than the one you get on Zcash, since a majority of tx there are unshielded. Even with a ringsize of 2 on Monero you already have better anonimity set than on Zcash...
Yea by having massive ring sizes
I think the anonymity set for Monero is already vastly larger than Zcash when it comes to receiver privacy because of one-time stealth addresses, but that isn't true for Monero senders (but you're right when it comes to t->t, z->t, t->z which is the vast majority of transactions )
All this debating will be pretty irrelevant though when FCMP comes to mainnet
zk-snarks ā„ FCMP++ > RingCT ā„ Lightning
Why the first one?
Theoretically, zk-snarks offers more privacy but in practice FCMP++ is more likely to achieve maximum privacy generally speaking.
So I was slightly inaccurate.
You're zefecing from the monero bros ,lš¢
What makes zk-snarks have potentially slightly more privacy than FCMP? I've heard this before but never heard the details
I don't see why that would be the case, might be wrong though...
This just misses the point...
It's not about comparing protocols it's about everything around it. Even with the best protocol you aren't really anonymous if it's only you using it (wink wink Zcash).
Really lacks nuance.
Yea z->z transaction volume is very low but it is more private than on monero. Fcmp will end the debate I agree.