EA has form for turning buyouts into shit. Look at PopCap who produced joyous casual-but-fair games until EA sunk their claws into them.

That interior is fantasy land. The final version will have airbags, seatbelts, air ventilation etc. I doubt it will have an egg holder. It will have lots of scratchy plastic and probably fabric or foam selectively glued in place to distract from the overall cheap feel. If they keep the bench seats they’ll probably still have to put a split so the driver / passenger are independently adjustable.

That 2CV concept was all over the place but I think it will get manufactured. The production version will need to change a lot of things (the concept is ridiculous in some obvious ways) but it will appear in a year or two with a crappy range, a bench seat, plastic everywhere and a roll up roof of some kind. The original 2CV was a terrible car too that sold itself on its cheap & cheerful mantra so I suppose if they capture that it will sell pretty well.

Imagine if he just struck a real deal with Iran. This crisis, of Trump’s own making would resolve itself.

My experience of using AI is it can save you a LOT of work, but you need to supervise it REALLY closely and give it sufficient code context for it to work properly. It only knows what it knows and if it doesn’t know it will make shit up. But if you do use it within its limits it will identify bugs, generate tests, generate a lot of boiler plate and help you be more productive.

Being open source is not a reason to avoid it. However AI does produce slop and unattended it can produce execrable patches which are practically incoherent to anyone used to human coding patterns. So there should be rules about coding style, patch / merge / pull requests that diffs are self evident, concise and obvious. Most AIs will read a guidance file so this stuff can be defined. And if a person uses AI to generate a patch they should review this patch first before daring anyone else to look at it.