The current system is already developing methods of basically downloading information into the brain. We are a few years off from consumer grade models being developed. Such devices won't replace all forms of education at first, but it will replace things like prerequisite courses.

We are a few years off from consumer grade models being developed. Such devices won't replace all forms of education at first, but it will replace things like prerequisite courses.

This is not what education should be about; it is this very philosophy that is at the root of many of the problems the education system today faces. They focus on facts and information, and skip over the important things, such as fostering wonder, fascination, and interest about the world in students, and teaching people how to reason, investigate, and think critically. Those are abilities that must be taught and developed, and they cannot be downloaded into your brain from a machine.

Actually critical thinking skills are nothing mystical and like any information they can be copied and downloaded.

If you are in the 10% of the upper class (or, of the "2%" gifted students) you will probably have some difficulties...

If you're in the upper 2%, you are also smart enough to know it and to make use of it by yourself.

Contrary to what most people think, intelligence by itself is useless.

So, useless as it is useless for bicycling to have strong legs if you don't even get on the bike

Having one very strong trait means nothing if any of the other necessary traits are absent.

I don't deny that, but intelligence is an exceptionally versatile trait, since it can be used to find new solutions and in some cases circumvent the lack of other traits.

Of course, if one factor is unescapably 0, the product is always 0.

I was the same way. Any kind of math I took before calculus I got easily. But calculus I couldn't get intuitively, at least beyond the easiest parts of it. What I don't understand is why it's a required course at universities. When are you ever going to need to know calculus? It's only applicable to a narrow range of job specializations. If you're planning on becoming a history or language major then it's a waste of time, and it could serve to keep an otherwise very qualified person out of their career if completing calculus courses is a graduation requirement. This is one problem I have with the system of education we have.

Intelligence, at least the way people like Mensa measure it, seems to me mainly to be how quickly the mind can understand and solve problems or abstract ideas. Which is extremely useful in almost anything you do. It's not determination or the ability to get things done, but if you have the determination, intelligence will make everything much easier. So, useless as it is useless for bicycling to have strong legs if you don't even get on the bike or people keep telling you that you shouldn't ride, but if get a small push and you do ride, you'll easily outrun others.

Also, the American scientists who use metric are government scientists and apparently they've crashed a few spacecraft because of confusion of measurements between systems.

What will future civilizations think when they look at us and cannot tell who did what? They will have to assume we were all the same culture if a scientific report in Germany and one from this American Federation are in a WorldWideBasic language and in SI Units so that nothing can distinguish whose achievements are whose.

The Confederate States of America). But try saying this United States is. That is Ebonics, not proper English. Now think of the sentence, "The United States is the wealthiest country in the world," and see how unnoticed this has gone.

You're right. There is no such country. A federation is not a country, it is a collection of states

I've logged weeks of research into the history of these United States. I am forced to conclude that we are federated states with a federal government touted as supreme.

its our mathematical language, and it defines us, makes us unique

I do not believe a nation should so easy throw its culture away, and America should not throw away is system of measurement to meet the standard of any state or federation on the planet.

If we make our units uniform worldwide, then we must make our language uniform and so on.

This demonstrates the validity of my earlier point that we are not a country, because people were willing to go to war over whether or not we are.

Lockheed Martin, which failed to adhere to the specified system of units in the thruster performance data they submitted. This error went unnoticed, and that caused the crash.

And anyway, the whole nationalistic concept of "Germans did this!" and "Americans did this!"

beyond the recognition of individuals

And if you think that our system of units is the backbone of or a large part of our culture, then I would say that we then have no culture to speak of and would be losing nothing by getting rid of it. (Of course, I disagree with that entirely).

I was using the word "country" in its general use, synonymous with the general use of "nation", which is to refer to a sovereign state or in some cases non-sovereign but extremely autonomous entities.
The United States of America is indeed a federation, as are numerous other countries. That does not grant you the power to refer to it by a totally different name and not be incorrect.

The USA is a collection of states united in a federal system, and aside from that just being plainly obvious, it's something that everyone is taught in school! Everyone in this country should know that information!

our mathematical language is base 10 mathematics

That is a non sequitur. I think we SHOULD do that, but if we have a uniform system of units it does not necessarily follow that we would also need a uniform language. Look at the portion of the world using SI units (i.e. pretty much all of it). They have been using said units for years and still have an astounding diversity in language and culture, and what changes there have been to those things can be traced to causes unrelated to metrication.

Country is not synonymous with nation in the way you were using the terms there, so this whole quote is nonsensical. Putting that aside however, it still makes no sense because you seem to be saying that if someone disagrees with whether something is true then it becomes not true. This is patently false.