Here's my context: I work with HIPPA protected files. I have to keep them secure. That means I need to step up my security game. My spouse works with another form of protected personal information. For the security of other people, we have a baseline that is higher than the average user. I'm not suggesting anyone who doesn't need it come to our level. I'm just suggesting a baseline that is more secure than full open.
I do understand exactly what's going on in my Mac and in my Linux boxes. Yeah, the OSes are huge, and I wouldn't want to hand-code them or spaghetti it, but the code is there, it's readable, and it functions on the same basic principles that have governed every machine I've owned since my TI94A.
Encryption does make a spy's job harder, and just on that, it's a net benefit to humanity. But there are a lot of people who do have reasons to feel threatened on a small scale basis. Two years ago, thousands of women spent months dealing with a small group of asshats who insisted on publishing their personal information and then making death threats and in a few cases, trying to fulfill the threats. That was G_*m*_r_-G-t-, and the fact that I not only disemvowelled the word, but salted it tells you how persistent those wastes of molecules are. And those shitstains on the toilet of humanity are the core of the Neo-fascists we're now calling alt-right. There are more than a few ex-spouses and ex romantic partners who make it their business to screw up the leaving partner's life. There are parents who cyberstalk and harass their children for being LGBTQ, or parents who would if their child's status was known.
Being open about one's name -- which I note neither of us are doing here -- is a point of privilege. It means we're mostly secure and not threatened. That's not universal.
= new reply since forum marked as read