"governments and corporations silencing dissidents has done far far more harm to humanity than people losing their accounts"
People can not loose their accounts, because they are governed which makes silencing possible.
e.g. a fly landing on a sheet of paper, blocking the print head long enough to generate "Tuttle" from "Buttle", resulting in a long chain of violent events for some unassuming individual…
Full privacy and anonymity are not virtues. They are actively bad. A system that is fully anonymous always becomes dominated by malicious users. De-platforming is a necessary capability of any system that expects to be used by a non-trivial segment of humanity.
> Historically speaking, governments and corporations silencing dissidents has done far far more harm to humanity than people losing their accounts due to forgetfulness etc.
This isn't complicated. If I have an account with some money in it, and I lose my private key, then it cannot be the case that I lose access to that money. There must be some phone number I can call, or some person I can reach, which can restore my access to my money. This is a table-stakes property of any system that can ever expect to be used by more than a tiny niche of humanity.
No, it's a trade-off. No KYC makes it possible for people to lose their identity, but it's also the only way to guarantee full privacy/anonymity, and to make it so the identify-provider doesn't have the power to de-platform anyone. Historically speaking, governments and corporations silencing dissidents has done far far more harm to humanity than people losing their accounts due to forgetfulness etc.