> companies compete to make their customers the smartest with their products.

You just 100% lost me. Our educational system needs to educate all, and let them succeed to the best of their abilities, where everyone has a chance at their best potential. The last thing we need is a new system with built-in inequality, where the some folks get the best curriculum and some do not.

I agree that education needs innovation, but I do not want anything to do with it being based on a foundation of competition.

There's a difference between the public school system and the education market (Khan Academy, Duolingo, Brilliant, etc.) Educational products are available to everyone to use. So, companies competing to make "their customers" the smartest is just whoever chooses to use their product, not some restricted class of people. Competition among companies is good when their products are available to all.

But unless you are working in the school system, your products are not available to all. They are available to people who have the additional time/money/devices to subscribe to them. That isn't "all". It will exclude many lower incomes demographics, which are the people most in need of innovation.

Clearly, you have every right to build whatever you wish, but your marketing is going to come off as completely tone-deaf if you profess to be a "revolution in education", when running as a competitive product company.