Thankfully, I am not your pupil. If you're not able to make an argument without sending people off to read into your own philosophies, you ultimately failed to make an argument.

You're' making a categorical error, as this thread is about an Automaton having direct, tangible real-world consequences for people's live trajectory. It's not about the legitimacy of the educational system itself, not about the relevance of grades. If it was, I would probably even agree with you.

Now, that your initial, ideological take has been rebuked after the very first try, you keep arguing a strawman from a privileged position of survivorship bias, with an outdated anecdote and an absolute refusal to acknowledge differential vulnerability, by reducing your pompous deliberations about systemic rot into individual failure. Effectively a cruel form of victim-blaming disguised as enlightenment. And probably one of the most US-American things to do.

But what is it now, the failure of the system or of the individual? Because your argument seems to be condemning the system as irredeemably corrupt, yet simultaneously you blame individuals for not transcending it. If the system is so rotten, how can individual failure to escape it be a moral failing? Of course you can't escape that contradiction without exposing your very own misanthropic disgust for those that didn't manage.

You, the irrelevant comet in my orbit, only drift further off into the void now, by distorting the problem of a 7% false-positive rate on a life-altering accusation into a one in a million (0.0001%) chance of terrible application of technology. Mixed with unfounded empirical claims about the material conditions about the labor market in the 21 century and spiteful jabs at potential live choices of the ones falling through the cracks.

Your attempts to claim authority are merely furthering your illegitimacy as a serious person. You're dismissed. Off you go, lil' irrelevant comet.