This just makes sense. They most likely did a repair or something underneath the bricks. To do this they took them all out and put them in a big pile, did the work and then started to put them back.

Now are you going to just put the bricks back quick and efficiently since all the bricks are the same, or are you going to inspect nearly every single brick with a line to ensure you are placing the correct brick in place?

I know what I would do.

New meaning to the phrase “deer in headlights”

What type of numpad is that? Looks like there’s an extra row.

That plate looks like it’s viewed from the bottom (like it’s glued to the ceiling). Trippy.

I get that. But it’s like sticking it to Google by not using their operating system… While handing them money for a phone.

I get that it’s an option, and maybe the best. But at the same time it feels like a shitty deal.

So, the solution to not give Google your precious privacy data through their software is to give Google your precious money to buy their hardware?

Just searched a bit, looking into how the length came to be and found this from wikipedia. https://simple.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Planck_length “The Planck length does not have any precise physical significance, and it is a common misconception that it is the inherent pixel size of the universe.” What I found elsewhere was that it’s the only length one can get out of the universal constans of G, c and h. So as far as I know with my limited know how is that the planck length is useful or more convenient than other lengths in quantum physics.

I think you could get it first try if you add the photo and measure what you can with calipers as well.

I’d just have a ruler placed next to the profile, taken a picture and traced it in CAD. If something is, lets say 64,5 mm in my initial trace I can safely assume that the dimension is supposed to be 65 mm. When you feel like you’re done, make a test and then maybe iterate.

Also agree that whatever approach you think is the easiest may be the easiest approach.