The responses raise some pretty good points - but do you think that there
is a level of detail at which public disclosure is OK? What about if transactions were randomly made public, with a probability of disclosure that increased with the size of the transaction? The chances of Sally's activities being made public would therefore be vanishingly small, but any cash flow, or series of flows, which were significant (in aggregate) would be made public with near certainty. Obviously, there are parameters that control this mechanism, and there is harm to be had, as well as good.
Are there sets of parameters for which the good outweighs the bad, and, if so, is there a parameter that maximises either the good / bad ratio, or maximises the good for a certain "acceptable" level of good, or minimises the bad for a certain "desired" level of good.