I believe they shouldn't. Whether to use them or not are trade offs taken if the user thinks it's worth keeping his/her privacy,
people have certain constitutions (u.s) and human(international) protections for certain forms or privacy and freedoms
however when it comes to finances.. well ..
you are not by default granted a human right to any financial privacy.
there are laws such as the bank secrecy act that tells financial firms to not share your data unless there is a suspicion of something the regulations find suspicious
so when people are shouting "i have rights" they are pointing to wanting to use the jurisdiction of the bank secrecy act..
which. then makes them at risk of the clauses of said act.
EG you cant claim you have a constitutional(U.S) right to free speach, unless you fall under the jurisdiction of america to claim that right. however by then being in that jurisdiction your then at risk of the other US laws.
..
i personally dont shout out some law/act regulation as my proof of ability of free speach.. i simply say, its my mouth, my tongue and my brain that tells it what it can or cannot say and no other brain or person can control it.. that is my freedom. only i can control my tongue. i do not rely on a law to protect my tongue. my teeth do that
anyways back to the subject,
becasue bitcoin was just a good/service/asset 2009/2014 whereby it was not classified by authoirities(governments/courts regulators) as a currency. bitcoin was free from currency regulations
but things changed when bitcoin became mainstream and became recognised as a currency legally. thus currency rules/regulations then appiled to services that wanted to operate with the currency under their licence.
yep if you were a fiat licenced service(MSB) and you wanted to accept/service bitcoin. you had to become a VASP(virtual asset service provider) and work under the extended policy terms of such.
where by if you want financial privacy(as granted by the banking secrecy act) you have to then take the advantages of their protections.. but. yes but. also have to live under their clauses.
so shouting you have some financial privacy right. is saying you are living and accepting of the bank secrecy act and all its clauses.
..
so lesson to learn. stop using the rules that end up playing against you by using a privacy tool which the privacy protection act deems as suspicion to break the clause of privacy and allow services to share information..
..
instead create a new tool. a new network for them side/niche/temporary things you want to do. and call it and describe it as something totally unrelated to anything that invokes the jurisdiction of the bank secrecy act
one example is call this new tool/sidenet/sub/altnet.. a property protection tool
which comes with more protections than a "privacy" related thing ever could