The question of how much information relevant to various areas of scientific and academic research should be shared is becoming more and more important as the pace of technological innovation quickens and the internet allows for instant collaboration. In my opinion, information is a valuable, potentially dangerous asset and should only be shared freely in particular circumstances.
Advocates of freely sharing information rightly argue that collaboration leads to faster results. This applies to scientists, who can help each by offering their individual research results, businesses, which can work together as long as they are not competitors on advertising or product development, as well as academics, who need fresh perspectives to push their work to higher plateaus. Take for example the potential for sharing information in the business world. Google has built their successful advertising business by working together with various companies and sharing information. Google collects a variety of statistics related to users including their location and interests. This information is shared with advertisers who can then better target ads for users. It allows the consumer to see more relevant products and services and the companies advertising to target their audience more efficiently.
While there are decided advantages like the one mentioned above, information is still a valuable asset that individuals and companies should safeguard. In a perfect world, we might expect people to openly share everything they know but the social and economic constructions of our actual world make this a naive proposition. One interesting example of this is from a recent news article about Elon Musk where he explained why his rocket company SpaceX does not apply for patents on any new technology. He reasoned that his main competitors are governments, not private companies. If his company discloses its innovations then domestic and foreign governments can take advantage of the shared technology and potentially disrupt his business. This is just one example of how sharing can prove damaging in a capitalist society.
In conclusion, though sharing might be a valid standpoint in a perfect world, it is not feasible under current global conditions. Instead of looking to increase sharing, governments should do more to support innovative companies and researchers. This will have a larger overall impact.
The question of how much
information
relevant to various areas of scientific and academic research should be
shared
is becoming more and more
important
as the pace of technological innovation quickens and the internet
allows
for instant collaboration. In my opinion,
information
is a valuable,
potentially
dangerous
asset and should
only
be
shared
freely
in particular
circumstances.
Advocates of
freely
sharing
information
rightly
argue that collaboration leads to faster results. This
applies to
scientists, who can
help
each by offering their individual research results,
businesses
, which can work together as long as they are not competitors on advertising or product development,
as well
as academics, who need fresh perspectives to push their work to higher plateaus. Take
for example
the potential for
sharing
information
in the
business
world
. Google has built their successful advertising
business
by working together with various
companies
and
sharing
information
. Google collects a variety of statistics related to users including their location and interests. This
information
is
shared
with advertisers who can then better target ads for users. It
allows
the consumer to
see
more relevant products and services and the
companies
advertising to target their audience more
efficiently
.
While there
are decided
advantages like the one mentioned above,
information
is
still
a valuable asset that individuals and
companies
should safeguard. In a perfect
world
, we might
expect
people
to
openly
share everything they know
but
the social and economic constructions of our actual
world
make
this a naive proposition. One interesting example of this is from a recent news article about Elon Musk where he
explained
why his rocket
company
SpaceX does not apply for patents on any new technology. He reasoned that his main competitors are
governments
, not private
companies
. If his
company
discloses its innovations then domestic and foreign
governments
can take advantage of the
shared
technology and
potentially
disrupt his
business
. This is
just
one example of how
sharing
can prove damaging in a capitalist society.
In conclusion
, though
sharing
might be a valid standpoint in a perfect
world
, it is not feasible under
current
global conditions.
Instead
of looking to increase
sharing
,
governments
should do more to support innovative
companies
and researchers. This will have a larger
overall
impact.