Convincing a verified user to move from a Binance verified account to Bisq is a burden and will realistically not work unless a version of Bisq fast enough, better than Binance in liquidity, technical specifications user-friendliness pops up.
I completely agree, but I'm also not sure such an exchange will ever exist. It is simply not possible to make a decentralized bitcoin-fiat exchange, which by definition requires users to back up their own wallet, browse offers or post their own, and deal with the slowness of the fiat banking system, which is easier and faster to use than a centralized exchange. The sad fact of the matter is that the vast majority of users simply don't care that centralized exchanges invade their privacy, track all their transactions, report them to governments, and seize their coins. All they care about is YOLOing in to some stupid altcoin for a quick buck. It is unrealistic to say "Well, privacy will be better once we convince everyone to stop using centralized exchanges". As much as I wish everyone
would stop using centralized exchanges, the only way for that to happen is if centralized exchanges cease to exist. If we want better privacy, and if we want bitcoin to remain fungible, then we need to implement change at a protocol level.
I can not call this fungibility when you are allowed to deposit your 1 Bitcoin on a Centralized Exchange and be allowed to trade and withdraw it freely while I am always afraid that my Chip-Mixed or Coin Joined Bitcoins are going to be seized anywhere I go, be it stores or exchanges.
I've never had a problem yet with having bitcoin refused or seized, but I also don't use any centralized exchanges. However, to say I am not concerned about this kind of privacy invading behavior spreading to merchants and affecting me in the future would be a lie, especially with the news of mining pools now excluding so called "blacklisted" transactions. The day I can't spend my bitcoin without completing KYC is the day I trade all my bitcoin to monero, I'm afraid.