Do you really need privacy?

Come join us for some informal philisophical discussion. No prior knowledge or research is needed, but an open mind is. This week we will be discussing the tension between privacy and transparency, and where the line should be drawn.

Discussion questions:

1. In a democracy, should citizens have the right to know everything their government does in real time (full transparency), or does the state need some legitimate secrecy (e.g., ongoing investigations, diplomacy, intelligence sources) to function effectively?
2. When private companies collect massive amounts of personal data to improve services and target advertising, is this a fair trade-off most people willingly make, or is it an unacceptable erosion of personal autonomy that requires strict regulation?
3. Should whistleblowers who leak classified or commercially sensitive information (e.g., Snowden, WikiLeaks, Facebook Files) be celebrated as champions of transparency, or condemned when their leaks put lives, elections, or national security at risk?
4. Is anonymous speech online (on platforms like X, 4chan, or whistleblower sites) an essential safeguard for truth-telling and political dissent, or does the shield of anonymity do more harm by enabling defamation, harassment, and disinformation?
5. If a government or tech company can prove that mass surveillance dramatically reduces terrorist attacks or serious crime, does the increase in public safety justify the loss of individual privacy?
6. Should journalists be legally compelled to reveal their confidential sources when those sources turn out to have lied or committed crimes, or is source protection an absolute principle necessary for investigative journalism?
7. In an age of deepfakes and disinformation, would requiring real-name verification for all political speech online create healthier public debate, or would it mainly empower authoritarian governments and silence dissidents?
8. Is financial privacy (anonymous cash, cryptocurrency, numbered bank accounts) a fundamental human right that protects individuals from both corporations and overreaching governments, or is it primarily a tool that enables tax evasion, money laundering, and terrorism financing?
9. When public figures (politicians, CEOs, celebrities) demand personal privacy, are they asking for a reasonable human boundary, or are they hypocritically demanding privileges that ordinary citizens do not enjoy?
10. If future technology allowed perfectly secure, opt-in “total transparency” (everyone voluntarily live-streams or logs their life 24/7), would the societal benefits (near-zero crime, total accountability, radical trust) outweigh the death of personal privacy—or would such a society become unlivable due to conformity and self-censorship?