"Government should place few, if any, restrictions on scientific research and development."
Whether government should place restrictions on scientific research has been controversial issues. Indisputably, radical science developments often bring disasters to people like the atomic bomb and side effects of drugs. Nevertheless, many regulations on research and development often hamper their growth. Thus, I generally disagree with the placing restriction, and would argue that only least amount of restriction is needed to protect from accidents.
First of all, placing any restrictions would weaken the nation's technological competitiveness. I would like to point out that the today's technology is winner takes all bases. To illustrate, let us look at the example of big data. In early 20th century, Facebook became dominant in social network business. Even many company like Twitter, Instagram, and Snap-chat followed its lead, but they couldn't success as much as Facebook. Moreover, after Google became popular, many search engine are weakened. They became popular because the US government continually supported them by providing internet security and financial support not putting restriction on their business. In this winner get all world, Government should support newly promising technology like 3D printer, Artificial Intelligence, and drone to become dominant in that field. Consequently, it is pretty obvious that putting restriction will weaken one's competitiveness.
Furthermore, it is hard for government to regulate those scientific research. Specifically, in South Korea, many different laws have been imposed on unmanned flying object called drone. However, only a few people are getting caught for their illegal use of drone, and many people secretly breaching the law. More restriction means more people and money, but the government only has limited manpower. This common sense have told us that more restriction would be another cumbersome for a government which demonstrates that restriction is unnecessary.
Admittedly, radical science development often cause accidents. This is true especially when it comes to the World War II when nuclear is used as a weapon. In addition, some unprepared medicines or surgery cause side effect. However, the above argument does not constitute a sufficient support to claim that government should place restriction. Instead, they should only penalize few people who maliciously take advantage on other people, and put only minimum restriction to protect their people.
In conclusion, although some science development brought danger in history, our technological development became possible with the government aid. As long as some preventive measure is performed, government should not place restriction on scientific research fact, they have to look for what promising field and give full support.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 1, column 1, Rule ID: SENTENCE_FRAGMENT[1]
Message: “Whether” at the beginning of a sentence requires a 2nd clause. Maybe a comma, question or exclamation mark is missing, or the sentence is incomplete and should be joined with the following sentence.
Whether government should place restrictions on...
^^^^^^^
Line 3, column 131, Rule ID: POSSESIVE_APOSTROPHE[1]
Message: Possible typo: apostrophe is missing. Did you mean 'todays'' or 'today's'?
Suggestion: todays'; today's
...ess. I would like to point out that the todays technology is winner takes all bases. T...
^^^^^^
Line 3, column 392, Rule ID: EN_CONTRACTION_SPELLING
Message: Possible spelling mistake found
Suggestion: couldn't
...d Snap-chat followed its lead, but they couldnt success as much as Facebook. Moreover, ...
^^^^^^^
Line 3, column 911, Rule ID: ONES[1]
Message: Did you mean 'one's'?
Suggestion: one's
...us that putting restriction will weaken ones competitiveness. Furthermore, it is ...
^^^^
Line 5, column 109, Rule ID: NUMEROUS_DIFFERENT[1]
Message: Use simply 'many'.
Suggestion: many
...research. Specifically, in South Korea, many different laws have been imposed on unmanned flyi...
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
but, consequently, first, furthermore, however, if, look, moreover, nevertheless, so, thus, in addition, in conclusion, first of all
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 13.0 19.5258426966 67% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 10.0 12.4196629213 81% => OK
Conjunction : 13.0 14.8657303371 87% => OK
Relative clauses : 11.0 11.3162921348 97% => OK
Pronoun: 30.0 33.0505617978 91% => OK
Preposition: 41.0 58.6224719101 70% => OK
Nominalization: 29.0 12.9106741573 225% => Less nominalizations (nouns with a suffix like: tion ment ence ance) wanted.
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 2375.0 2235.4752809 106% => OK
No of words: 410.0 442.535393258 93% => More content wanted.
Chars per words: 5.79268292683 5.05705443957 115% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.49982852243 4.55969084622 99% => OK
Word Length SD: 3.04443104384 2.79657885939 109% => OK
Unique words: 241.0 215.323595506 112% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.587804878049 0.4932671777 119% => OK
syllable_count: 722.7 704.065955056 103% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.8 1.59117977528 113% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 10.0 6.24550561798 160% => OK
Article: 1.0 4.99550561798 20% => OK
Subordination: 3.0 3.10617977528 97% => OK
Conjunction: 7.0 1.77640449438 394% => Less conjunction wanted as sentence beginning.
Preposition: 7.0 4.38483146067 160% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 25.0 20.2370786517 124% => OK
Sentence length: 16.0 23.0359550562 69% => The Avg. Sentence Length is relatively short.
Sentence length SD: 36.0177733904 60.3974514979 60% => The essay contains lots of sentences with the similar length. More sentence varieties wanted.
Chars per sentence: 95.0 118.986275619 80% => OK
Words per sentence: 16.4 23.4991977007 70% => OK
Discourse Markers: 5.28 5.21951772744 101% => OK
Paragraphs: 5.0 4.97078651685 101% => OK
Language errors: 5.0 7.80617977528 64% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 7.0 10.2758426966 68% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 15.0 5.13820224719 292% => Less negative sentences wanted.
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 3.0 4.83258426966 62% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.232941177734 0.243740707755 96% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0661859539011 0.0831039109588 80% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0843845169152 0.0758088955206 111% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.144223939554 0.150359130593 96% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0418416856349 0.0667264976115 63% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 14.0 14.1392134831 99% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 38.31 48.8420337079 78% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 7.92365168539 111% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 11.9 12.1743820225 98% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 16.01 12.1639044944 132% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.82 8.38706741573 105% => OK
difficult_words: 114.0 100.480337079 113% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 7.5 11.8971910112 63% => OK
gunning_fog: 8.4 11.2143820225 75% => OK
text_standard: 9.0 11.7820224719 76% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 70.83 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 4.25 Out of 6
---------------------
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.