Non-anonymous coins are not fungible.
@iamnotback: I'm curious to know your stance on this. Does your new coin tackle this issue (if it's really one)?
Notwithstanding my opinion on whether governments are going to tax and attempt to fragment crypto-currency, higher valued transactions are more at risk than microtransactions. I just can't fathom the government attempting to ask people to report and pay taxes on every $0.0001 transaction they do on social networking. So since I am mostly focused on scaling out crypto-currency for social networking and apps gamification (think small payments for in game upgrades, etc), then i don't view anonymity as a crucial issue for fungibility in my targeted priority area.
My opinion is that governments are going to be forced to reduce regulation of crypto-currencies not increase. Because it is a global phenomenon that they don't have jurisdiction over. One-by-one they will fall like dominoes into this reality, especially as crypto-currency becomes more and more popular.
Additionally I believe there is a global monetary reset coming 2019-2024ish, in which we will have a global financial governance established with the World Bank, IMF, and SDRs. Thus the nations will turn to this new institutional regulatory power to regulate the global crypto-currencies without impacting fungibility. (See my posts in the Martin Armstrong thread of the Economics forum on why I believe this will come)
Privacy is I think a stronger argument for why we need some form of anonymity sets in our crypto-currency. I plan to do something low overhead with offchain mixing (with a new invention I have for that) to achieve a commensurate level of privacy for the market I am targeting. For every high valued finance, I am thinking Zcash's technology may be the best. The trusted key setup does not impact anonymity, only could allow hidden debasement (inflation). I think they will figure out a way to make these private keys in a way that corporations trust the veracity. I am not sure if I still see a need for Monero's form of anonymity. Maybe, I and I need to spend more time analyzing that. Haven't had time lately to focus on anonymity. There was an issue with Monero's viewkey being superior, etc...
In the past I dreamed of a perfect e-gold wherein our anonymity was absolute. I now realize that is not feasible and would violate the fundamental laws of physics. Analogous to we can't do anything in real life without some risk of it being known to someone else, the same will be true online. It will be impossible to have perfect assurance of anonymity. So we shouldn't be modeling fungibility on the assumption of perfect anonymity. Fungibility can be I think modeled on the assumption that the people-at-large will demand that their Internet money be globally fungible. It will be considered a basic human right that Internet money and access be without borders/barriers. The globalists want this. I believe the elite created Bitcoin as a Trojan horse against nation-state and banking interests selfishness. They are using us to force a wedge between nation-states and banks, and the global village reality of the Internet. We are the partners of the global elite, not their enemy. This is why we see Richard Branson offering his private island to Bitfury group's conference:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Rep37R3l3_4
This is why we see Nicholas Negroponte at the Montreal Scaling Bitcoin conference talking about Internet access and money as a basic human right:
https://scalingbitcoin.org/presentations
https://youtu.be/0SnjrdQtf8Y?t=537