Many believed that the inventor of Bitcoin wants to remain anonymous to avoid legal consequences as what happened during 2007 about E-Gold, one of the first digital money (Bernard, 2017). On the other hand, I think it would be better if the founder of Bitcoin will reveal his identity since many countries recognized the essence of this cryptocurrency.
He probably does or did want to remain anonymous due to the spotlight that would inevitably be shined on him and all the pressures that come along with that. E-Gold is completely different though. That was a centralized service. Bitcoin is the opposite. Even if Satoshi's identity was known, it's not like they could go after him and try get him to shut bitcoin down because it's just not possible (but maybe he didn't want the stress and hassle of the government even trying). Bitcoin is out there now and I think satoshi just wanted it to become its own thing naturally without any further intervention needed from him.
If this might happen, it will contribute for more development of digital currency and regulations in Bitcoin procedures. Also, the acknowledgement must be given for the person who invented the most efficient digital currency in our society.
What are your thoughts?
I disagree. What's the logic behind him being publicly known helping the development of bitcoin or regulation thereof? I don't see how it would make a difference whether he was known or not, but I can't really see anything positive coming from it. People would attack his character and background, and also probably rely on his opinion too much and who's to say he's even happy with the direction bitcoin has gone in? He may want to steer bitcoin in a direction some are unhappy with, or the state could try put pressure on him to try push it in a way that they favor. I think it's best he just remains as he is as bitcoin is doing okay without him and that's probably how it should be.