For one thing, the "NIMBY" problem gets much worse when a multi-billion dollar company has a substantial portion of its worth tied to the value of the homes that it owns. The last thing we need is an incentive for huge firms to benefit from limiting housing supply.

Owning real estate property isn't the same as other assets, your investment effects your neighbors.

How does knowing who I am making neighbor's life any easier?

If they want to complain - they can do so to local authorities or local regulators.

Complaining to your asshole neighbor even knowing who he is doesn't help to resolve your issues any better.

I'm no expert, but as far as I can tell, "The Law" has been a last resort in resolving local disputes between neighbors. It's heavy, slow, and expensive. Rather, custom and direct negotiation have been the mainstays for orderly civic relations.

Anonymity essentially takes all of that and ejects it. Without a new legal framework to replace it (that you almost certainly will like less because it will both cost more, and demand more access to you by the state), demanding that formal legal means be used in all contacts with you is demanding that your neighbours pay significantly more to achieve mutual ends. All while giving the rest of civil society the brush off: "I've got mine, you can kindly go have a nice day."

I guess the idea of community is pretty much obsolete, but the smallest unit of governance, like say a home owners association, would probably undermine your anonymity if you chose to participate.

In that case, shouldn’t there be a public registry of people who invest in weapons manufacturers, oil companies, and other corporations that produce unhealthy products?