MikeSharp01

Yes we managed 0.2 on the PH scale. It did need thinking through and attention to detail everywhere but it came out OK for us. We did all the air tightness work ourselves so did not rely on trades to do it.

Ah - that was to address the issue raised by @Onoff at the top here and not have the groove running through switch as it is relatively small - I think the double sockets work with the groove running through. I could double the switch faceplate as all the switches in the house are on the mini grid system. So I could use blanks in the remaining slots as I only need three switches.

Yes, good point, the table in our case is going to be a shelf just below the plug socket and above the lamp / Network socket. There is only 300mm from the bedside to the in panel door edge so its a squeeze but does need thinking through.

Looks like I can achieve this setup. The brown is the paneling (150mm centers), The Cyan is the King Size divan. The circle is the 400mm reach from the corner of the bed to reach the light switches, the white with center lines is the final stud and the sockets and switches look OK to me. As @garrymartin says I could stop the grooves below the Sockets and restart above but I feel it looks more authentic if they run through the center of the sockets.

Yes I have drawn it all up and I can avoid the single socket issue OK I think. Both are focused on Bedside sockets which need to match the bed width - chose king size but spaced so a super king will just fit between the sockets - just! Getting it right is a further pain on one of the walls as it has two doors in it which the other half of the partnership wants to be secret and open on the 'V' grooves - hence the bespoke panelling!

Good old Chesterton - basic systems theory back in 1978 building on the standard INPUT-PROCESS-OUTPUT. Since then a load of other Systems thinking 101 bumper stickers: "Everything is connected to everything else.", "These who neglect History are destined to repeat it.", "Beware your baggage.", "Investment Challenges Change.", "As an attacker, winning the fight will make you the defender." and "The S curve is the pattern of Everything." Then introduce complexity & chaos theory and watch heads explode! Ho Hum....

It's 12mm thick so I can go deeper. I think I will make a sample and see how I feel.

I am making, because the commercial stuff is too thin to act as the actual wall, and fitting V groove panelling in our bedrooms and am not sure what depth I should rout the V grooves. I have looked at commercial panelling and it comes out between 3 and 5 mm deep - I prefer 3mm but is that enough on a 4m run - will it just feel lost. I also have to fit a number of plug sockets and light switches in it and am wondering what the best way to do this as I would like to use dry lining back boxes as there is no structure behind the panelling. Will this look odd with the grooves running behind the face plates? Any thoughts?

Hire, or purchase and resell, some steel road plates - the ones with the corner holes to allow you to move them about - like they use to cover excavations in the road. Works well until some bright spark puts a crane leg down on one and bends it!

No they have just put in the base cables. When they come to fit the socket they will add another length of cable between the sockets on the left.

I assumed - it's a timber frame and so it seemed like a good idea, I guess I should read up and see what's what. I have it all done in fireline board so it feels wrong to fit a bare plastic back boxes although I guess you could assume the fascia will do the job?

I am getting very frustrated with the Scholmore metal dry lining back boxes. They look great in the blurb but I have either got a bad batch or something is fundamentally wrong with the design. They are difficult to fit as the spring mechanism that holds lugs is almost always dysfunctional, slides out of its guide at the bottom & tilts over so takes a lot of fiddling to get it to grip and fitting the face plate involves even more fiddling. Maybe I am missing something but I cannot see what. So I am looking for alternative solutions to fire protection in drywall back boxes. I have found these inserts: From Astroflame which look can work with both plastic and metal back boxes so I can use the standard plastic back boxes and fit these things although, to be honest, they also look a bit clunky - does anyone have an experience of these inserts or perhaps a better solution all round to the problem.

While this is exciting stuff and I applaud the work being done I have not seen the counterveiling discussion around moving energy from the core to the surface and the consequences there of. If we cool the core what are the consequences? As I said this is exciting stuff but we should have learned by now that our use of planetary resources has consequences and geothermal energy may not be a 'renewable' resource.

We have the AFT raft system and very good it is as was the service we received - shame all round.

People get confused about small nuclear and tend to say "they have them in nuclear submarines so why not take that technology and pop it into ships" - sounds like a fair plan until you realise that the fuel for these subs is weapons grade (95% enriched) to reduce / remove refuelling demands to 30 years plus - refuelling less highly enriched 10-20% is very complex and expensive needing specialist facilities. We have limitations treaties on the fuel so that's a limiting factor as well. Also many countries do not allow nuclear powered ships to dock for safety reasons, you need greater security for the ship when travelling and much better trained crews.

Sounds like your system is open to the main sewer, have you got a dry trap somewhere - washing machine for instance or maybe an air admittance valve (AAV) is stuck and your loo flushes are sucking a trap dry.

Seems rather crude just to screw into a casing, might be more robustly done with rivnuts or some such.

Do you run your systems automatically, manually or semi manually. I guess I can see how you could 'mess up' in manual mode but how might you 'mess up' in the other two?

Pretty much sums it up! So are all the walls in your place interactive so you can live in this psychedelic paradise you have prompted into existance- reminds me a bit of a scene from the Ipcress file - @SteamyTea will no doubt find it and add it to this thread.

No, well that might be where the rest of us are. Here is my summary: You started with using local LLMs to develop some automation, tried to recreate 'Alexa' or some such and had some success doing it but you got taken over by the need swell your memory so you handle even more billions of weights etc then got involved in multi modal stuff and games development and now you are lost up the Orinoco without any memory of the journey or the objective - so essentially without a paddle!

Seems to me that you are so far off Piste that you have taken to asking Claude to create new Pistes for you to play in. Just give us a catchup on what you are are actually trying to achieve so we can get some context without pasting all 17 pages into Claud only to have it tell us that its been working on this with you but it has no clue where it might all end up.

We perhaps need to find some common ground here so we can identify the aspects we can agree on and then discuss the things we don't - this is usually (still) a good basis for discourse and otherwise we are contributing to the death of nuance and increasing polarisation which gets us nowhere. All it does is improve our ability to throw language laden bricks into the opposing camp. So to kick this off perhaps: Can we agree that the planet is warming up whatever the cause? If we are able to agree at least that we can perhaps then discuss consequences, mitigation strategies and opportunities it brings. Only after that we can discuss evidence for causal factors, natural cycles, human activity, adjustments by the operators of the simulation we are all living in - the science, or otherwise, of what is happening.

If you think it through the answer must be that it does not. If you watch a toddler you can see the principle at work - they are happy operationalise, they understand it, although they perhaps cannot explain it. It only takes an inspirational teacher in a school to expolain it and suddenly its clear what the method is. Make an Observation: Identify an event or ask a question about the natural world that requires an explanation. (Can I climb this hill thing [stair]?) Form a Hypothesis: Propose a testable, educated guess or plausible answer to your question. (Let's see) Conduct an Experiment: Design a controlled test to see if the hypothesis holds true under specific conditions. (One step , crawl climb of whatever) Analyse the Data: Examine the results gathered from the experiment to determine patterns or trends. (Yep I am at the top / nope I have hit something that stops me - the stair gate!) Draw a Conclusion: Decide whether the evidence supports or rejects the hypothesis. If rejected, the hypothesis is modified and the process restarts. (I can climb / I need to modify my approach and try when the stair gate has been left open.) To operationalise it in any field of advanced research does need a lot more education and experience - that I agree, but not the scientific method itself - that is child's play!

Wow - that's some landscaping - its been so long since one has seen so many terraces in a design- looks great and once it has grown in it will look amazing. Until the epilogue then.....

How tall do you need to be to operate those switches.