I'd go with more. If everyone had their inner thoughts and secrets exposed, I would bet that most everyone would have something that would embarrass them. Then we'd realize how normal variances are. Getting rid of a lot of the tabooness surrounding these topics. - Andrew

I think that if we could cope with that as a species we wouldn't have developed the ability to keep them in the first place, so I'm going with less. I'm not familiar with how Brin touched on this subject. In one of his books I assume? Which one? - invariant

Probably less, but it would be a lot easier to get over. - Ms. Nakachi

In that reality, "like" or "dislike" would go away, as well...Actually it seems in reverse to me: disguises fall away/secrets are "exposed" when we love one another and ourselves inclusively, fully - Maryam

In the comic book Moonshadow, by John De Matteis (sp?) and John J Muth, the obscure alien race punished a planet by making them all telepathic at once. It tore the society apart. I'd kinda go with that version. :-) http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki... Reviews at amazon here....http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki... - moon_shadow70

@invariant, we aren't the only animals to use deception. I wonder what the difference between deception and secret really is.... is language and long term memory required. Or an ability to care that the deception was committed more than simple food, shelter, reproduction competition? - moon_shadow70

@invariant: I see my question as an extension of the core theme of Brin's “Transparent Society”... - Anthony Citrano

I'm with @Nakachi on this one. - Kenton

Assuming that 'secret' includes knowing when your friends and family have hated you, cheated on you, imagined killing you, etc., I'd have to say less. A LOT less. - FFing Enigma

The haters would hate more, the lovers would love more, and the ambivalent would doggedly do less with more. After the initial sound-bite warfare that would ensue, Secret Media Experts would slowly but surely mind-blog that the accounting of human memory is a stream of consciousness that at best can only lead to vague conclusions. - Micah

Something I once heard... For some people, it would be a great joy to have all the people they've ever known in a room at the same time. For others, it would be hell. Openness would really screw up some people's strategies for living life (whereas I would love it). - Mitchell Tsai

I'd say more. We'd have a big shock when we say how much our trust in people had been betrayed; then there would be a countershock when we say how much we had betrayed people's trust; and we'd wind up being forced to learn to forgive ourselves, and each other. - Nathaniel Thurston

I'd say more. Secrecy (and policies that rest on it) leads to short term exploits of one individual group over another that are unstable (as the truth leaks out or becomes evident) and bad for us as a whole. Call me naïve, but I think that being forced to see how similar and flawed we are rather than pretending that some people are deserving whilst others are worthless would make us a lot more careful about how we live. - Robin Barooah

I agree with Nathaniel and Robin. I think that many relationships - business, personal, and otherwise - are based on inequities of available information. Were that all equalized, we'd be forced to love and accept (or not) the other person for 100% exactly who they are. At the same time, others would be making that analysis - and choice - about ourselves. I think it would be turbulent but ultimately good. - Anthony Citrano

I'm having a second thought about a subclass of the population, comprising maybe 1% - 5%: the sociopaths. I'd say that the people who make a lifelong habit of getting over on others will like it a lot less as things get more transparent. - Nathaniel Thurston