My parents were always "readers" and growing up our house was always full of bookshelves stacked to overflowing with books and magazines.
I spent a lot of time as a pre teen and teenager going through my dad's unbroken collection of Scientific American magazine starting from the late 60s. I suspect Martin Gardner's column has had a direct influence on my career choices and why I hang out here... I remember many occasions when peers at university were first learning about things like Conway's Game Of Life, Penrose Tilings, and RSA public key crypto - and I'd be "Doesn't everybody know all this already? I think I read about this before I was in high school!"
Notable quote: "For example, to test a 130 digit odd number for primality requires at the most (that is when the number is actually prime) about 7 minutes on a PDP-10 computer."
http://simson.net/ref/1977/Gardner_RSA.pdf
(Tonight I might see if I can still remember how to make a hexaflexagon...)
Later in the article, the author speaks to an estimate that 40% of children will learn to read despite how they are taught.
Somewhat related but I know someone the same age who seems to struggle with this. They regularly misunderstand what people mean online or fail to recognise satire (especially having issues when someone quotes a part of what they said implying that it was very strange/confusing/mocking it). I'm sort of at a loss thinking of a way to resolve this because to me its not even something I really thought had to or could be learned.
Though, like by the time 1st or 2nd grade came along, I don't remember anyone in the class who was having problems reading. And I was kind of a bully, so I'm sure I would have made fun of them if someone was struggling (and I have a good memory of my put-downs!)