> That would hurt society more than help because once the algorithms are public, the code's inner workings can then be gamed and abused. That's the paradox or contradiction: for the algorithms to be effective, they have to be kept a secret to prevent gaming.

What level of algorithmic transparency can one achieve without sacrificing gaming?

I ask this question because this is a common discussion for many aspects in our society. For example, we have designed laws over 100s of years despite the knowledge that they can be prone to gaming. The existence of gaming itself is not a good enough reason to have ZERO algorithmic transparency.