Some people believe that it is good to share as much information as possible in scientific research, business, and the academic world. Others believe that some information is too important or too valuable to be shared freely.
In this modern era, restricting information for the sake of public security and national importance seems irrational to many while others opine that information should be available only when the authority deems them suitable for access. Both views would be examined in this essay. I personally believe that scientific studies, the academic arena, and businesses can be greatly benefitted if the information is made open to them without restrictions.
The proponents of restricting sensitive information believe that unrestricted access to information could penetrate state security, lead to public outcry, hand over technologies to terrorists, and facilitate corporate monopoly. So information has to be properly scrutinized before making them public. In this digital era, information spread like wildfire and for the sake of maintaining global peace, it should be delimited, according to this group of people. For instance, if nuclear technology is shared with all nations for scientific studies, the world will soon stand on the verge of obliteration, despite the incredible possibility this technology possesses to facilitate the citizens' energy demands.
On the contrary, those who advocate for unobstructed access to information say that scientific research largely depends on available data and previous findings. If valuable information and past findings are not shared openly with academics and researchers, global progress will become a standstill. For instance, the Internet is probably the most significant invention the modern world has produced and if this technology had not been shared by the US military, we would still be living in the pre-internet era. Moreover, clandestine information has no value if it is not implemented in the real world and thus curbing them is like slaughtering the potential for progress. World history suggests that the human race has advanced due to discoveries and inventions shared with the world as each finding went through profound modification and advancement. I thus personally favour the ideology that supports "free information for all".
In conclusion, information has limited value when it is constrained and not shared with great minds. For true global progress, restrictions on valuable information should be debarred and let people know the truth instead of keeping them in the dark.
- Today TV channels show more men s sports than women s sports Why is this the case Should TV channels give equal time to women s sports and men s sports 78
- In a number of countries some people think it is necessary to spend large sums of money on constructing new railway lines for very fast trains between cities Others believe the money should be spent on improving existing public transport Discuss both thes 78
- The bar chart below shows the top ten countries for the production and consumption of electricity in 2014 73
- The increase in the production of consumer goods results in damage to the natural environment What are the causes of this 84
- The bar chart below shows the percentage of Australian men and women in different age groups who did regular physical activity in 2010 67
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 4, column 683, Rule ID: POSSESIVE_APOSTROPHE[1]
Message: Possible typo: apostrophe is missing. Did you mean 'citizens'' or 'citizen's'?
Suggestion: citizens'; citizen's
... technology possesses to facilitate the citizens energy demands. On the contrary, t...
^^^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
if, moreover, so, still, thus, while, as to, for instance, in conclusion, on the contrary
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 15.0 13.1623246493 114% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 9.0 7.85571142285 115% => OK
Conjunction : 13.0 10.4138276553 125% => OK
Relative clauses : 9.0 7.30460921844 123% => OK
Pronoun: 25.0 24.0651302605 104% => OK
Preposition: 40.0 41.998997996 95% => OK
Nominalization: 20.0 8.3376753507 240% => Less nominalizations (nouns with a suffix like: tion ment ence ance) wanted.
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 2013.0 1615.20841683 125% => OK
No of words: 355.0 315.596192385 112% => OK
Chars per words: 5.67042253521 5.12529762239 111% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.34067318298 4.20363070211 103% => OK
Word Length SD: 3.09550422379 2.80592935109 110% => OK
Unique words: 200.0 176.041082164 114% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.56338028169 0.561755894193 100% => OK
syllable_count: 621.9 506.74238477 123% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.8 1.60771543086 112% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 5.0 5.43587174349 92% => OK
Article: 4.0 2.52805611222 158% => OK
Subordination: 2.0 2.10420841683 95% => OK
Conjunction: 2.0 0.809619238477 247% => Less conjunction wanted as sentence beginning.
Preposition: 6.0 4.76152304609 126% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 15.0 16.0721442886 93% => OK
Sentence length: 23.0 20.2975951904 113% => OK
Sentence length SD: 58.4575819624 49.4020404114 118% => OK
Chars per sentence: 134.2 106.682146367 126% => OK
Words per sentence: 23.6666666667 20.7667163134 114% => OK
Discourse Markers: 5.93333333333 7.06120827912 84% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.38176352705 91% => OK
Language errors: 1.0 5.01903807615 20% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 10.0 8.67935871743 115% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 2.0 3.9879759519 50% => More negative sentences wanted.
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 3.0 3.4128256513 88% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.279449515069 0.244688304435 114% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0990018031314 0.084324248473 117% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0422168996507 0.0667982634062 63% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.182405404327 0.151304729494 121% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0153616036621 0.056905535591 27% => Paragraphs are similar to each other. Some content may get duplicated or it is not exactly right on the topic.
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 17.1 13.0946893788 131% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 31.21 50.2224549098 62% => OK
smog_index: 13.0 7.44779559118 175% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 14.6 11.3001002004 129% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 15.9 12.4159519038 128% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 9.71 8.58950901804 113% => OK
difficult_words: 111.0 78.4519038076 141% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 17.5 9.78957915832 179% => OK
gunning_fog: 11.2 10.1190380762 111% => OK
text_standard: 18.0 10.7795591182 167% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 78.6516853933 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 7.0 Out of 9
---------------------
Note: the e-grader does NOT examine the meaning of words and ideas. VIP users will receive further evaluations by advanced module of e-grader and human graders.