Open weight models are kind of weird because they're usually just a bunch of weights and maybe a chat template, not even test vectors or anything. Quite odd, and probably one of the reasons why vllm, sglang, the llamas etc. so often produce buggy output. It's actually quite strange how little attention is given to verifying these setups work.

Why cant the community piece together the open-weights using open community-based like, implementation or whatever magic sauce integrates those weights

Isn't speed under verbal authorization limited to like 30-40 km/h?

Kinda grating to have the story of your project told in default Claudese, to be honest.

The introduction seems human written, but the slightly technical bits after that are clearly AI written, which makes sense, since the system that's being described was written by AI as well.

Well you still take a compromise on range, charging speed, comfort, size etc. with those options.

Building strafe.chat and expecting people to not expect it’s a D/s chat app is hilarious.

Also “strafe on your desktop”. Plus this is obviously entirely vibecoded.

An M4 Sherman is about 6m long which production SUVs don't reach. That's about the length of an L3 delivery van, which is usually the longest version they make.

The M4 is 2.6m wide. No car is 2.6m wide. That's wider than a coach bus.

The M4 is 3m tall. Even the fattest SUVs do not come close.

The M4 weighs 30+ tons.

Even the Hummer H2 is only 2m wide and 2m tall. And it's 5m long. It's about 3,000 kg.

The HMMWV is somewhat heavier in many of its configurations. but that's an actual military model. It's still a bit under 4,000 kg.

Those are some of the biggest SUV models extant.

False. M1E means type approvals will be valid for ten years instead of requiring compliance to changing / updating rules and requirements on a roughly biennial schedule. The requirements will be the same as the current M1 requirements. You can just sell an outdated/unsafer car for way longer without investing into changes and R&D.

> Sure, but that's a different kind of safety than _crash_ safety.

It literally is not. Both are crash safety systems, active and passive, respectively. The active category also includes things like ABS and ESP.

> (which, mostly, I already prevent by paying attention)

This is an extremely well researched area (car crashes cause trillions in dollars of damages annually and therefore get a lot of attention) and not to the support of your stance.

Collision avoidance isn't crash safety, and while both are valuable, they are not the same.

EX2 has short range and charges even slower, I doubt it's a particularly interesting car for europe outside certain niches (like delivery services).