Well see, now you're actually making good points that do have some value to them.

First and foremost, that a concept built by a bunch of students, it doesn't have to be perfect, it's goal is to prove the concept. The first ever built plain that actually worked wasn't perfect - does that mean people who built it should've abandoned it?

Not everything has to be equally viable in all circumstance. Building made in regions with high seismic activity are built in a way to account for that activity. If one lives on a flatland with zero seismic activity - those extra resources spent on a building might seem worthless to such a person, but they are not and if said person says that "they can just build normal houses there, what's the issue? " then the person is ignorant (and also a complete prick).

As to the car failing as an SUV - I haven't seen where they driven during the test run so I can't say whether or not it failed. They got from the point A to the point B so if I had to guess I say it worked fine.

P. S. I'm not sure why I'm wasting my time on this with that attitude of yours with prove me wrong and such... Yeah, whatever