Original image

Classic Atari 2600 Video Games

Original image

I'm a fan of retro gaming. My memories of early home video games are filled with brilliant animation, amazing sound, and engaging plots. But when I look back at the games now, there's a little something missing from most of them -- it's more bleeps and bloops than I remembered. Let's take a stroll down memory lane with some Atari 2600 titles I played in my neighbor's basement...and a few I wish I had.

Pac-Man, March 1982

Look, I have a few fond Atari memories, but this is not one of them. I mean, come on. The graphics glitches here are beyond absurd (the ghosts must "take turns" appearing on the screen, hence their constant flickering), and the sound effects make me want to gouge my ears out. This game is infamous for being a crappy port of an otherwise excellent arcade classic.

Adventure, December 1979

Here's a 34-second run through of Adventure on its easiest setting. Yes, this game involves dragons, though I always thought they were giant ducks. The hero is simply a square.

Pitfall!, September 1982

Pitfall! has a special place in my heart. It was really hard, and it actually had a lot of depth for its era. In this video, a player shows us a typical game.

Guess who else liked Pitfall!? Jack Black. Yes, that's a very young Jack Black selling video games:

Frogger, 1981

Although I played this at the time, I don't remember all these flickering-sprite problems (similar to Pac-Man above). The technical limitations of the Atari 2600 were severe indeed.

Yars' Revenge, May 1982

Here's a brilliant example of using the limitations of the system to make a fun game. The glitchy graphics are all intentional, and add to the sense of creepy madness. Even the sound effects are moody, despite being primitive. If you don't get what's going on here, read the Wikipedia page.

The Empire Strikes Back, 1982

Each AT-AT Walker had to be hit 48 times to destroy it. "Whenever you hear the Star Wars theme, the Force is with you!" This is from "How to Beat Home Video Games," a retro goldmine.

E.T., December 1982

Although I never played this as a kid, its crappiness is legendary. (Reportedly, unsold cartridges were buried in a New Mexico landfill.) Just imagine popping this into your 2600 and...enjoying...falling into holes over and over for some reason.

If you like this game, check out this guy's six-part explanation of why he loves it.

Joust, 1982

Let's end on a high note. I remember being completely entranced by Joust -- you got to ride a flying ostrich and fight computer-generated guys flying ostriches. What's not to love?

What Did I Leave Out?

Share your Atari 2600 memories in the comments, and include a video link if you've got one. There's a lot of this stuff on YouTube, folks.

Original image
iStock // Ekaterina Minaeva
Man Buys Two Metric Tons of LEGO Bricks; Sorts Them Via Machine Learning
May 21, 2017
Original image
iStock // Ekaterina Minaeva

Jacques Mattheij made a small, but awesome, mistake. He went on eBay one evening and bid on a bunch of bulk LEGO brick auctions, then went to sleep. Upon waking, he discovered that he was the high bidder on many, and was now the proud owner of two tons of LEGO bricks. (This is about 4400 pounds.) He wrote, "[L]esson 1: if you win almost all bids you are bidding too high."

Mattheij had noticed that bulk, unsorted bricks sell for something like €10/kilogram, whereas sets are roughly €40/kg and rare parts go for up to €100/kg. Much of the value of the bricks is in their sorting. If he could reduce the entropy of these bins of unsorted bricks, he could make a tidy profit. While many people do this work by hand, the problem is enormous—just the kind of challenge for a computer. Mattheij writes:

There are 38000+ shapes and there are 100+ possible shades of color (you can roughly tell how old someone is by asking them what lego colors they remember from their youth).

In the following months, Mattheij built a proof-of-concept sorting system using, of course, LEGO. He broke the problem down into a series of sub-problems (including "feeding LEGO reliably from a hopper is surprisingly hard," one of those facts of nature that will stymie even the best system design). After tinkering with the prototype at length, he expanded the system to a surprisingly complex system of conveyer belts (powered by a home treadmill), various pieces of cabinetry, and "copious quantities of crazy glue."

Here's a video showing the current system running at low speed:

The key part of the system was running the bricks past a camera paired with a computer running a neural net-based image classifier. That allows the computer (when sufficiently trained on brick images) to recognize bricks and thus categorize them by color, shape, or other parameters. Remember that as bricks pass by, they can be in any orientation, can be dirty, can even be stuck to other pieces. So having a flexible software system is key to recognizing—in a fraction of a second—what a given brick is, in order to sort it out. When a match is found, a jet of compressed air pops the piece off the conveyer belt and into a waiting bin.

After much experimentation, Mattheij rewrote the software (several times in fact) to accomplish a variety of basic tasks. At its core, the system takes images from a webcam and feeds them to a neural network to do the classification. Of course, the neural net needs to be "trained" by showing it lots of images, and telling it what those images represent. Mattheij's breakthrough was allowing the machine to effectively train itself, with guidance: Running pieces through allows the system to take its own photos, make a guess, and build on that guess. As long as Mattheij corrects the incorrect guesses, he ends up with a decent (and self-reinforcing) corpus of training data. As the machine continues running, it can rack up more training, allowing it to recognize a broad variety of pieces on the fly.

Here's another video, focusing on how the pieces move on conveyer belts (running at slow speed so puny humans can follow). You can also see the air jets in action:

In an email interview, Mattheij told Mental Floss that the system currently sorts LEGO bricks into more than 50 categories. It can also be run in a color-sorting mode to bin the parts across 12 color groups. (Thus at present you'd likely do a two-pass sort on the bricks: once for shape, then a separate pass for color.) He continues to refine the system, with a focus on making its recognition abilities faster. At some point down the line, he plans to make the software portion open source. You're on your own as far as building conveyer belts, bins, and so forth.

Check out Mattheij's writeup in two parts for more information. It starts with an overview of the story, followed up with a deep dive on the software. He's also tweeting about the project (among other things). And if you look around a bit, you'll find bulk LEGO brick auctions online—it's definitely a thing!

Original image
Nick Briggs/Comic Relief
What Happened to Jamie and Aurelia From Love Actually?
May 26, 2017
Original image
Nick Briggs/Comic Relief

Fans of the romantic-comedy Love Actually recently got a bonus reunion in the form of Red Nose Day Actually, a short charity special that gave audiences a peek at where their favorite characters ended up almost 15 years later.

One of the most improbable pairings from the original film was between Jamie (Colin Firth) and Aurelia (Lúcia Moniz), who fell in love despite almost no shared vocabulary. Jamie is English, and Aurelia is Portuguese, and they know just enough of each other’s native tongues for Jamie to propose and Aurelia to accept.

A decade and a half on, they have both improved their knowledge of each other’s languages—if not perfectly, in Jamie’s case. But apparently, their love is much stronger than his grasp on Portuguese grammar, because they’ve got three bilingual kids and another on the way. (And still enjoy having important romantic moments in the car.)

In 2015, Love Actually script editor Emma Freud revealed via Twitter what happened between Karen and Harry (Emma Thompson and Alan Rickman, who passed away last year). Most of the other couples get happy endings in the short—even if Hugh Grant's character hasn't gotten any better at dancing.

[h/t TV Guide]