Looks like a Factor One copy.

If only, it might actually have an interesting geometry then. Also the "rendering" and "real life" photos are AI garbage

I do not have a general crank length/hip closure issue. The above was observed in a position with more forward pelvic rotation than you're likely to see from 99% of starters of a WT TT. I do intend on shortening my crank length some time in the future to hopefully make that position at least somewhat sustainable, but I'm not currently in a rush, as what most would consider an aggressive position is still relatively unimpinged for me.

I normally run a full backwards cleat position, but today I moved them 2 mm forward, nothing was changed on the bike. I immediately noticed it was easier to "get over the top of the pedalstroke" and much less constricting in the aero position, this should be because I was able to "drop the heel" more at the top of the pedalstroke. Unfortunately after 40 min of riding I had to stop and slam my cleats back again because I was getting severe hot feet and this was with the extremely stiff sole of a Bont shoe. I have had similar issues in the past but at the time I attributed them to oversized and flexible shoes. After moving the cleats back, I instantly noticed more hip closure in the aero position again, even when I was consciously trying to drop the heel.

So I would say if your interest is being fast, you should definitely at least see if you can get along with a more forward cleat position. Now I'm thinking I might need to look into adapter plates to get my cleats even furter back to see if that can completely eliminate my hot feet problems.

Entirely proprietary cockpit and headset with very limited options and even more limited support. IMO, one of the worst trends in the industry right now. I'd stay away just because of that.

That oval chainring inaccuracy is not at all universal, as the article says, it really only applies to power meters which measure cadence once per revolution and assume the angular velocity of your pedalstroke is constant, those power meters should be considered garbage and avoided. Even if you don't use oval chainrings, the angular velocity of your pedal stroke is never constant. It spikes and dips on every revolution.

This is a long-solved problem, a proper power meter measures angular velocity continuously with a gyroscope and/or accelorometer and uses an up to date force and power measurement on every sample. Usually the sample rate is in the hundreds, maybe even thousands per second. Such fine granularity effectively eliminates any potential inaccuracy that would arise from unexpected pedalling dynamics.

Magene and pretty much every spider power meter on the market should have no problem with this. 2-3% of drivetrain loss is about what would normally be expected. Though there is the question of if the trainer is attempting to take that into account in any way or not and if yes, how much.

The Mira geometry is, on paper, a direct, almost 1:1 copy of the S5, the only real difference being a slight adjustment to BB drop. However the S5 (and the Y1RS) have divergent seat posts, which means the actual seat angle in practice is often steeper than what is on paper. The Mira seat post is collinear to the BB centre, so the stated seat post angle is the actual seat post angle.

Direct mount easton chainrings basically don't exist, especially 2x. That leese set is the only one I'd ever seen.

The seatpost is interesting to me in the way that it seems to get narrower and deeper on the upper part. There's a chinese brand making these types of seatposts as aftermarket upgrades.
https://www.pandapodium.cc/product/ganna-aerofin-seatpost/

Given that they haven't been selling these for very long and that specialized usually spend a year+ on prototyping layups and stocking up product for release, I wonder if there were any idea leaks from the specialized factories that led to the above product.