Your Answer ▼
It is true that
nowadays are so much many useful information on the Internet. Some people argue that
sharing information is critical to for the purpose of education. However, other people claim that some data should be
protected. 교육을 위해서 정보를 공유해야 한다는 내용은 주제에서 제시한 과학/산업/학술 정보와는 관련이 없습니다. 주제를 더 명확하게 소개해주세요.
On the one hand,
there are some people arguing that all of the information should be shared
online. With the development of the Internet services, all people can easily
have access to the specific data by using the Internet searching tools
regardless of place and time. As a result, people have been able to learn about
the interesting educational area in detail by themselves. For example,
nowadays, there are lots of valuable lectures and information on the Internet
such as TED and National Geography, which has allowed people to acquire
professional knowledge and enhance their outlook. 인터넷 사용을 통해 쉽게 정보를 얻을 수 있다는 내용은 주제와 아무런 관련이 없습니다.
On the other hand,
other people believe that illegally
sharing data is the infringement on intellectuals. 불법 공유에 대한 내용도 주제와 관련이 없습니다. By exposing specialists'
long-term studies, they have not come to properly reward, which makes them
undermine their morale at the end. Moreover, it can bring about economic
losses. To be specific, some corporations
possess their own critical information which can be key to their success.
However, if someone discloses the company's secret information to competitors,
their corporation value can be dropped significantly. Take the example of
Korea. Several years ago, a certain IT company have come experience leakage of their confidential to classified business information
leakage because an executive has sold to their competitors illegally. Thus, the corporation's value has
declined exponentially, which also causes caused damage to the nation. 비공개 정보를 경쟁자에게 누설하는 것 또한 주제에서 묻는 정보 공유와는 개념이 다릅니다. '누설'이 아니라 '공유' 자체에 초점을 두고 내용을 풀어주세요.
In conclusion, both
views have strong points. However, I personally agree with the idea that the
latter view is more convincing for two reasons: contribution to the infringement of
intellectual property and damage to the corporation and national economic
value. |