The Hypercult of Transparency[nice choice of words!] exists because people keep falling for the Transparency=Accountability meme. And until the rather recent advent of homeomorphic encryption, that meme did have some rather humongous amounts of truth to it. However, given the existence of homeomorphic encryption, this no longer rings true.

Speaking of homeomorphic encryption and Facebook:

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=19288633

Whats the connection between discussions about "the cult of transparency" and homeomorphic encryption?

Presumably that accountability could be achieved despite secrecy, through code. Also see Zero-knowledge proofs

Yepp.

The three body problem book part 2 also explores a fully transparent society; It's really interesting with all the sides effects (They can't lie, etc.). I recommend anyone to read it !

I read the first and while the ideas explored were interesting, I found the writing itself to be completely off-putting:

- first of all, Three Body seems like the most boring videogame ever developed, not sure how people could actually be believably playing that.

- the characters are pretty much caricatures of stereotypes (the cop), or just plain uninteresting.

- the massive exposure/infodump chapters killed the immersion from me, especially the ones written from the point of view of the other side of the conflict: it really felt like the author was getting towards the end and wanted to Explain All The Things, but couldn't find a subtle way to do so within the narrative, therefore decided to just vomit it all in a single spurt.

I was really looking forward to it but found it disappointing, won't read any more from this author.

Agreed, it's some of the worst prose I've ever read. Since I don't read Mandarin, I can't know how much of it can be blamed on the author and how much on the translator. There are some really interesting ideas in the novel but also some patently absurd ones, not to mention the terrible dialogue and characters.

I felt the same. I wonder if some of these issues stem from the fact that the book was originally written in Chinese (iirc)... maybe some of the infodump sections seem more natural in the original tongue?

Isn't the premise of that book that privacy is a deep human need, and that its erosion goes against our intent?

I would argue that the next generation coming up will have little to no _need_ for privacy. When you grow up with nanny cams in your bedroom, privacy per se isn't even valued, let alone met with an expectation.

Nanny cams won’t change the fundamental nature of human beings. If privacy was a deep human need a generation ago, it will continue to be for foreseeable generations. Technology has created an illusion of progress and transcendance of our own nature but in truth we’re still merely advanced primates.

There is a thoughtful counterargument to Han here:

https://mesocosm.net/2013/10/01/digital-humanism/

IMO it doesn't sufficiently deal with the problems of the "full transparancy" ideal that Han points out though.