Recently, there have been more incidents of cross-chain bridge thefts, half the people in the group are shouting "Privacy on the chain," while the other half are saying "Compliance or it's all over." My own expectation is actually quite low: the blockchain isn't a stealth cloak; it's more like a glass fish tank, at most with a frosted film added. Ordinary people should not interpret "privacy" as "never traceable," but rather as reducing the probability of being casually scanned.

As for compliance, don't be too romantic about it. To put it plainly, the entry and exit points (exchanges, fiat channels) will still require your information if they need it, and as long as the on-chain activity involves money flow, someone will eventually be able to connect the dots. Recently, after the oracle reported abnormal prices, everyone collectively "waited for confirmation," but I actually think this is a real-world boundary: when something goes wrong, first save your life; slogans like privacy and freedom have to be put aside for now. Anyway, when I look at protocol proposals now, the first thing I check is how the revenue is generated and whether the switch can be turned off with a single click... Fun fact: the more switches there are, the fewer stories there are.