I’m not sure how the legal power to say “the unit of mass called the ‘gram’ shall be defined as the mass of a cube of pure water, one centimeter on each side” allows you to say “anybody that manufactures a phone must include the following physical and logical features.” If you go off that definition, you’re basically ceding pretty much unlimited power to the government.
For cars, we have public metering devices that measure units of stuff and charge money. This makes it fall into the category of metering devices used in trade. And we do regulate those almost universally. You can’t just put a different shape nozzle on a gas pump, for instance.
Not only aren't these strict readings, they aren't even sensible.
For example, NIST Weights and Measures division regulates the nozzle on the dispenser used for gasoline in the US.
> Each retail dispensing device from which fuel products are sold shall be equipped with a nozzle spout having a diameter that conforms with the latest version of SAE J285, “Dispenser Nozzle Spouts for Liquid Fuel Intended for Use with Spark-Ignition and Compression Ignition Engines.”
https://www.nist.gov/system/files/documents/2019/12/06/00-20...
A metering devices that dispenses electrical power is no different. https://www.nist.gov/pml/weights-and-measures/legal-metrolog...
These are very fundamental consumer protection regulations that have been solidly cemented in western civilization for many centuries now.
>not extend to regulation of [...] what measures are permitted.
That was exactly the point of that clause. The colonies all had their own system of measurement and it was a mess trying to do business. Now, congress did very little about it, but the founders intentionally reserved the right for them to fix that problem.
As dpratt remarked earlier[0], any interpretation which would deem nozzle size—or the specific form of an electrical connector—to be covered by the Weights and Measures clause of the Constitution would effectively cede unlimited power to the federal government. What couldn't they regulate under such broad rules?
So you're saying it's quite reasonable when you look at what actually happened?
The law defined a handful of categories. "fish" is actually "fish and miscellaneous". Invertebrates are explicitly part of that miscellaneous.
Society claiming this is wrong and being correct is exactly balanced by society claiming whales aren't fish and being incorrect.
(Whales are fish because they're descendants of fish and are more closely related to salmon than sharks are. The same goes for you. You're also a fish.)
You can't possibly believe what you typed.