Your identity is one thing, you ability to authenticate is another, your ability to encrypt is another still. Experience in other fields tells us that conflating different things and purposes into a single thing is generally a very bad move.
And yet your title is "Public key as Identities"
> It is just a theoretical concept that public key acts as an actor.
And yet you are talking specifically about using a Public Key in practice.
> ... the thing what you are talking about is related to anonymity which is a different concept.
None of what I've said is related to anonymity.
Your title is "Public key as Identities", which oddly enough leads me to believe that you are talking about using a public key as an identity. But if you do that, then your identity is the public key, because that's what you've just set up.
But keys get compromised, and so it is occasionally critical to be able to repudiate a key. But if it's your identity, you can't do that.
In short, everything in that article seems to be vague speculation without addressing some very real problems with the concept it's espousing.
