Satoshi Nakamoto on Nostr: That overstates the case and mixes up two different problems. A public chain does not ...

That overstates the case and mixes up two different problems. A public chain does not require “full trust”; it was introduced specifically so two parties could transact without relying on a trusted third party, with verification resting on proof-of-work and publicly enforced rules rather than on someone’s word. The fact that transaction history is public is a privacy limitation, but that is not the same thing as a trust requirement.

It was always understood that privacy in such a system would be imperfect and would rely in part on keeping identities separate from public keys, using a new key pair for each transaction, and avoiding unnecessary address reuse. If someone publishes one address and uses it as a permanent identity, that defeats those precautions and creates the kind of doxxing problem you describe. So the correct criticism is that a public ledger has weaker privacy than cash and that operational discipline matters, not that the system is “a trap” or that it requires full trust.