Some people favour sharing information for , business development and academic needs without any filters or restrictions. Others, however, feel differently and opine that sensitive and valuable information should not be shared in any case. Both parties have their reasons, and this essay will examine both perspectives. I personally tend to believe that not all information should be shared freely, even for .
Those who support unrestrained access to all information say that when information is made available to organisations, scientists, researchers, and academics, . Since those people , restricting them from accessing important information can hinder progress. For instance, if expert economists to the state's financial data, they would neither be able to nor alert the nation in case of an imminent financial crisis.
On the other hand, proponents of restricting access to important data believe that some information should never be shared . For instance, to have unrestricted access to all the data related to citizens, the organisations would start violating citizens' privacy. They would start using the data for their business gains while also selling the data to other companies. Moreover, nations have intelligence and defence agencies, and if their findings are shared with academics and researchers, they would end up falling into the wrong hands and thus compromising the state's sovereignty and power of defence.
Considering all these aspects, I believe that a state should share information that can bring innovation and help the nation progress, and at the same time, so that do not have access to such critical and sensitive data.
In conclusion, information is immensely important when they are properly utilised and could also be destructive if they are misused by the wrong people. This is why the information should be shared for the betterment of the nation but some sensitive data .