Quote from: BITSSA : BITCOIN EXCHANGE on September 24, 2018, 09:11:38 AM

We at Bitssa.com believe that anonymity will create a trust deficit in Bitcoin as a viable investment option and a value storing digital currency. The only reason why there is so much confidence in the market for Bitcoin is that all the transactions are available in the public domain in real time. This is why people have trust in Bitcoin. We all know that Bitcoin is based on the highly secured, sophisticated and advanced Blockchain Technology. As every transaction on the block needs approval from various sources on the network, it makes Bitcoin trading a transparent and accountable process. Therefore, to do away with the 'public character' of Bitcoin and bringing in anonymity will compromise with its security feature and further create suspicion in the public's eyes. And most importantly, adding anonymity will also facilitate terror-funding, illegal transactions, and black money laundering, etc. Hence, it is extremely important that Bitcoin should retain its essential character as a highly secured, transparent and accountable value storing virtual commodity rather than becoming a dangerous instrument in the hands of a few mischief-mongers willing to commit financial crimes if anonymity is granted to it.

As much as I see the points in anonymity possibly challenging the existing Bitcoin blockchain's recognised value as an auditable, verifiable method of payment, I don't know about this trust deficit in it being viable investment.

I feel that people are confident in Bitcoin because it works, it continues to get better at working, and survives threats all the time - more and more people are accepting it for payment, more and more are using it properly. All these investors and people who use it to store value don't really care about the inner workings, not when majority owners probably never signed a transaction themselves, much less know their private keys.

Transactions will still be verifiable for the parties involved, though maybe true not auditable externally without permissions, if anonymisation features were to be implemented.

After all, the "public character" of Bitcoin is still - wrongly - that of a private and anonymous money. Started out like that, and somehow still has that tag (just check the media headlines). This is the false logic that if you make something better at protecting personal freedoms, you do so at the cost of facilitating all that bad terrorist shit. States use it pretty well, let's not help them sell the kool-aid.