-rick-

None of the AI companies are making money, their users are spending far more in compute resources than they make in subscriptions and as the models get more complex the cost goes up (there are limits to power/data centre availability and compute demand is going up faster than Moores Law scaling). Once you get the real bill for your use you might suddenly find your laziness lessens

And those that are financially and politically motivated (though political motivation is often driven by financial interests as well) I'd prefer this government to what we had before or Reform but they really don't seem up to the challenge we face in basically any field. I wasn't expecting anything miraculous but I'm geniuinely shocked at how back they are and the country seems to agree (ratings not far off the Liz Truss budget atm). Zero chance that would fly in the past and likely still today (though less so). When's the last time they put up fuel duty? Not entirely sure about this. We get solutions to problems designed around constraints in our system. We have so many layers of crap that we keep building on rather than fixing the underlying problem. No doubt the current system is incredibly inefficient and the money could likely be better spent but I do think the uptake is likely higher than if they hadn't done anything and fixing the underlying problem is something that would take years, though we should be laying the framework for that now.

There are ways you could do this, but it sounds like this isn't your only issue. First useful thing I found when I searched, there will be easier ways: https://www.dpreview.com/forums/thread/3946145 Can you infer the building from the sequence they were taken in? I would expect if you go through the pictures numbering and labelling things it might be possible to show the route you walked the building and thus where the photos are. This seems like the bigger deal than the geotagging. How thoroughly have you checked? Maybe something is visible in the background of another photo or maybe a walk around video (if you took them). How would it affect your SAP score if this was assumed to be the default value? (I thought it was possible to move forward on that basis but I might be misunderstanding). That all said, the easier option is to find someone willing to work with what you have without a fuss if thats possible.

@Canski is the location data in the photos simply not accurate enough to figure out which site the photo was taken in or is the person just not willing to look at it? If the former, can you say with certainty based on something else where the photos were taken?

Well that sent me down a rabbit hole. I think what I've said above about licences likely only applies if you have on-site generation and even then maybe it's only bigger scale - really not finding much info. Looks like it's perfectly fine to do sub-metering to tenants so long as you don't profit - charges need to pass through. That does of course mean any sale would have to be a leasehold sale for it to continue after sale. This does sound like the easiest way to sell, though if you were looking to sell you could also price up the cost of a connection to the grid at that point.

So long as you own both properties and aren't metering the use of energy/recharging I doubt there is an issue in the short term assuming you can get past building control (not sure about that aspect). Doubt you'd be able to sell the property seperately though. If the property is close to your existing then I suspect the cost of electrical connection will be much lower than the previous connection as the DNO should be able to reuse a chunk of the work they charged you for last time. If it's far away then trenching from your existing house to the new would also be expensive. Having said all that, I'm out of my depth here, replied earlier because I am aware of the restrictions on resale of energy, etc, not sure about anything beyond that.

I'm sure there was a previous thread with a similar issue but I can't find it right now. What I did find is this one: Which includes the attached PDF that suggests geolocation embedded in the image is ok. It does suggest that the file name of each photo includes which plot though. Something you could handle with some tedious work if needed. Technical_Bulletin_A_Guide_to_Photographic_Evidence_for_New_Homes (1).pdf

Would this be an annex style property dependent on the first? AirBNB with all bills included? If so then I think this is ok. If it's a property you want to be independently leased out or sold then I think theres an issue. AFAIK you are not allowed to privately resell energy without registration and a license and it certainly wouldn't be worth the admin, etc, to do that for a single house, it does happen in large blocks of flats with shared energy systems.

The site refers to meeting the needs of approved document L appendix B. Having just read that I can't see why your photos do not meet the standard. All the app does is stamp the image with the information that is embedded in the metadata. If the assesor isn't happy accessing the meta data how about using a program to extract that data and overlay it on the images. With a little scripting you could even make the last modified date on the files match the original. Not looked but I suspect you could script something like infranview to do this without too much trouble (ask ChatGPT?). Without cryptographic attestation there is no way that there is any way anything could be enforced. Worst case your assessor doesn't accept and look for another with the modified images and don't tell them you modified them by adding the overlay.

Living the dream!

I tend to try and assume the best. Even if this thread isn't entirely serious who knows who will look at it in future.

I would be hesitant to use external ply. They will likely be questionable from a food safety POV. Honestly, using ply seems like a significantly more expensive and less good option than finding a second hand source. Also, the veneer on ply is very thin and will come off/start splintering PDQ even if you are careful. You can make a good kitchen surface with ply. Get some 25mm or thicker high quality birch and laminate some melamine on top of it but this is not at all cheap.

Just guessing but 2-3mm of stainless is pretty stiff especially if folded over front and back and will likely be supported by a frame. Commercial kitchen stuff is not cheap. Plenty of surfaces are less than 44mm now, but they are all designed to go on a well supported base.

If you are really short on cash, maybe look on gumtree/fb marketplace for someone wanting rid of one (free if you collect). Plenty of people replace perfectly good surfaces and if you find a big damaged one might still be able to cut it down to a smaller size to fit your space. Look for something based on wood/laminate if you want to be able to adjust it to fit your space as that's the one that can be altered with simple tools.

It really doesn't. Maybe it used to but but now with every news outlet scratching around for money and everyone just wanting to get news on a free website/short video clips the most common motivation behind a headline or an article is 'What will get the most clicks?'. The number of staff dedicated to investigations or detailled reporting has been slashed to almost nothing. Instead of a journalist being given time to research a story, talk to people to understand the subject, etc, they are expected to churn out 2 or 3 click worthy articles a day. An article on a website, even the big ones, has a good chance of either being substantially written by AI or by a PR agency pushing a certain line because the outlet is just not earning enough money to pay for more staff. This doesn't just affect the for-profit media either. Both the BBC and Guardian are supposedly non-profit with funding sources at least partially outside of ad-sales/readership but they have been following the same pattern (maybe a little slower). Thats before touching on the partiality of a lot of our news sources these days, which overall is slanted to the anti-environmental right and thus those outlets are even less likely to report on good environmental news.