Worlds hardest jigsaw vs. puzzle machine (all white)

2023 ж. 3 Ақп.
5 117 142 Рет қаралды

Пікірлер
  • Big thanks to everyone who supports me on Patreon! That support allows me to spend such insane amounts of time on projects like this. If you’re interested in support these projects, check out patreon.com/stuffmadehere

    Stuff Made HereStuff Made Here2 ай бұрын
    • You are an internet God right now

      Roland YoungRoland Young2 күн бұрын
    • Neat hidden message btw.

      Shino Asagi GamingShino Asagi Gaming15 күн бұрын
    • It doesn't matter what I say, but I really think you're pushing yourself a tad too far by taking on more extreme challenges after another. At the end of the day, it's not the difficulty of the challenge that keeps the majority of us coming back; it's your personality, intelligence, charm, and neat project ideas that we love! Try doing a fun challenge next, instead of a hair pulling one! For the sake of your stress ❤

      FalloutFalloutАй бұрын
    • I recently saw a 6DOF CNC mill and i think that that would be a great next project! The person calls it Hexapetron!

      DylmanDylmanАй бұрын
    • You didn't have to paint the pieces. All you had to do was white out the pictures! After all, you *still* want to visually verify the fit. Spurious twins *do* exist in puzzles. (I know, because I've been doing large jigsaw puzzles since I was 2.) So you don't actually know for sure that you got the *right* fit, just *some* fit.

      Rock BrentwoodRock BrentwoodАй бұрын
  • "If at first you don't succeed, reduce your expectations until you're a success" what a line

    KfimenenpahKfimenenpah2 ай бұрын
    • Ben Franklin had very witty versions of this theory

      jeremy godwinjeremy godwin4 күн бұрын
    • Words to live with !!!!!!

      38911bytefree38911bytefree11 күн бұрын
    • @glasslinger a German former professor of mine said "If you fail, try again. If you fail again, try again. If you fail again, that's enough trying, I'm going to have a beer"

      Daniel WallaceDaniel Wallace16 күн бұрын
    • This is how computers and programming work, really. A lot of stuff had and has to be simplified to get a working prototype. You can then work to get closer to your original expectations, once you have a working model. It is way easier to expand a working model than to create a complex one from scratch.

      Uwe SchmidtUwe Schmidt17 күн бұрын
    • Sounds like dating advice 😅

      Derek WallaceDerek WallaceАй бұрын
  • Loved how you were like "Luckily, I only have to do this 1 time" "2 times" "3 times" . Video was fantastic! I love your content!

    RADRaze2KXRADRaze2KXАй бұрын
    • the second time around i bet he didnt actualy do it haha

      RKs WorldRKs World12 күн бұрын
    • I loved how he immediately upscaled from like 16 to 4002 instead of doing something like a 64 puzzle piece.

      WinjinWinjinАй бұрын
  • I love the grounded reality of this channel!! Despite the recession, I'm so happy 😊 withdrawing my $94k profits out of my investment with a platform in town™√

    James d GeorgeJames d GeorgeАй бұрын
    • I'm placing my investments with Mrs. Carmen Alise right away can't miss this great opportunity

      Gandolfo CostaGandolfo CostaАй бұрын
    • @Isabelle Morrison Thank you for this. Will definitely reach out to her now. Thanks again

      Elvis rawElvis rawАй бұрын
    • Tell her I referred you, also remember to share your testimony with others ☝️🇺🇲....📌

      Isabelle MorrisonIsabelle MorrisonАй бұрын
    • She's active with this ╪𝟭𝟲𝟬𝟮𝟳𝟴𝟬𝟳𝟲𝟴𝟰 currently.

      Isabelle MorrisonIsabelle MorrisonАй бұрын
    • What’s apq ⏬⏬

      Isabelle MorrisonIsabelle MorrisonАй бұрын
  • This is an incredible video and is so inspiring to me. Like the whole thing is a collection of impossible levels of frustration, failure, changing expectations, and perseverance. The fact that this project, which some would call a failure, is still such an objective success as a lesson in computer science and the realities of practice instead of theory makes it such a beautiful video. It's just like you said, the journey was the destination. Thank you for always creating such great content.

    Canadian BoydCanadian BoydАй бұрын
    • @Puzzardo Salami but it accomplishes a series of other sub tasks fairly well, it just doesn’t work as a whole. so i guess it depends on your standard

      Canadian BoydCanadian Boyd29 күн бұрын
    • "which some would call a failure", man the thing literally can't do the thing it's supposed to do, how would you call it 😂

      Puzzardo SalamiPuzzardo Salami29 күн бұрын
    • This is the perfect comment... don't forget.. wife is always freakin' hilarious!

      Ben PorterBen PorterАй бұрын
  • That moment I realized that you were basically taking the integral of the edge of the puzzle piece was amazing! That is so clever!

    Micah BruceMicah BruceАй бұрын
  • “It is, without a doubt, THE hardest project that I’ve done.” I love how this is how he feels after every project. Shane rules.

    Max RosenbaumMax Rosenbaum2 ай бұрын
    • @Stuart Morrow To an extent, that might be realistic. Very powerful characters don't care that you exist, and very underpowered characters don't bother to oppose you.

      jpaugh64jpaugh642 ай бұрын
    • It's like Dragonball Z where the enemies just happen to come in increasing strength

      Stuart MorrowStuart Morrow2 ай бұрын
    • tbf each project he's done has gotten more and more complicated in succession, so it makes sense that every one would be the hardest

      Dahlia ExurranaDahlia Exurrana2 ай бұрын
    • Yeah... What if he's specifically looking for projects to push his boundaries?

      jpaugh64jpaugh642 ай бұрын
  • It's insane to see you work. You're amazing and very, very gifted. Thanks for the incredible videos!

    BarcagBarcagАй бұрын
  • This is a very good summary of programming. The journey is very interesting and the destination is very satisfying, but some problems on the way can drive you slightly insane.

    AmikkeAmikkeАй бұрын
  • Here's a question: Was the white side of each piece well defined? I've seen puzzles that are printed on BOTH sides, so you don't know which side is up.

    David HoDavid HoАй бұрын
    • I think the answer is yes because he only painted one side

      MadaxeMunkeeeMadaxeMunkeee9 күн бұрын
  • Boy, this project looks like it took a piece of your soul with it. But good damn job, man. And hey, hilariously, despite all the months of time this has taken, it is in fact still faster than doing this by hand.

    Collapsar 77Collapsar 77Ай бұрын
  • Honestly, reducing expectations and being able to accept "good enough" is an incredibly powerful and important skill for an engineer to develop. It's not being lazy, it's being efficient with your time.

    Zachary WilliamsZachary Williams2 ай бұрын
    • @dgthe3 - that was my off the cuff response to someone that said 3 was good enough which I took sarcastically. You just reiterated what I wrote but tossed more detail. It had nothing to do with the fact the pi is always "rounded" whether it be 1 digit or a billion digits.

      Ace AceAce AceАй бұрын
    • @Ace Ace Pi being rounded 'for the most part'? It's always rounded and will always be rounded. We don't know every last digit of pi, and never will. So we can't do calculations with the 'full' value of it. But it rarely matters much. You could engineer something using 100 digits of pi, but the physical part that results can only be made & inspected so precisely. Plus, given the interaction between all the various parts with each other & the environment, there is probably going to be something that can compensate for not using more than a handful of digits. Whether it's a safety factor in the static design, or the control system for something dynamic, there is usually something that allows for a bit of error.

      dgthe3dgthe3Ай бұрын
    • And a good skill for people who are perfectionists

      Carson LawlerCarson LawlerАй бұрын
    • It's also incel mentality.

      Mark ShimanMark ShimanАй бұрын
    • Succeed first, perfect second. You cannot perfect first as you will never succeed.

      Quickcall ComputersQuickcall ComputersАй бұрын
  • Your tenacity is inspiring. Or frightening. Still processing that choice. That said, I loved the video and listening to your process. Thank you.

    Jim HoodJim HoodАй бұрын
  • This video came out at the same time as my robot uni project, which was simply to place 15 cubes on a grid in different patterns. I got humbled real quick

    SimSimАй бұрын
  • great video! really love the time lapse at 17:17 - inspiring! your videos always help me learn and make me laugh!

    Brad GangelBrad GangelАй бұрын
  • Wonderful engineering video ! I love that you show that solving complex problems takes time

    Robert ValRobert ValАй бұрын
  • Anyone that knows anything about automation knows how ridiculously hard of a challenge this is. Your projects are all so intense dude, love it!!

    Eric CochraneEric Cochrane2 ай бұрын
    • @Fonk Badonk Thanks for sharing! Having just a basic understanding of the complexity of your work, and others like you, it's a marvel to me that automation has taken over so much production. Obviously it's extremely difficult work now, but think about the early to mid days of automation when computing power was so much less. But I guess the more power we get the more complex things we take on, so it's probably likely that the complexity is greater today. I dunno.

      SE GambleSE GambleАй бұрын
    • @Fonk Badonk Oh yeah trying to talk complexity with non engineers/ laymen is impossible. I have given up trying.

      sacredgeometrysacredgeometryАй бұрын
    • @Sarsaparilla Sunset You sound like you dont learn much

      sacredgeometrysacredgeometryАй бұрын
    • Automation engineer with a background in IT here. It's REALLY frustrating at times conveying to customers which problems are the hard ones, because from a human standpoint the match between problem and hardness is often entirely different from a computer's point of view, which also don't have such a nicely "standardized" set of sensory input as humans. (Seemingly) simple issues like a scale giving slightly off measurements that don't quite match with what the level or flow meters report, but your PLC only getting the weight, while the people in the plant can clearly see the other values, can and WILL lead to deviations from the product's recipe. Nearly impossible to explain if you're not being lucky enough to have a techy of the customer involved. (Which is negligent and shouldn't happen, but hellooo real world.) And that's an extremely simple example. Like, bottom of the barrel.

      Fonk BadonkFonk BadonkАй бұрын
    • What an utter waste of time

      Sarsaparilla SunsetSarsaparilla SunsetАй бұрын
  • Really awesome stuffs, Learned a lot with them : )

    Tharinda DharmasenaTharinda DharmasenaАй бұрын
  • Love my Puget Systems machine!! And the people there are amazing, never gotten so much help troubleshooting from a computer company. And love your amazing videos too!!!❤

    SPEARFISHERSPEARFISHERАй бұрын
  • Thank you for taking the time to simplify into digestible pieces

    Mr HoodMr HoodАй бұрын
  • you know what i absolutely love about this build, aside from the feat of engineering? the fact that this machine is not truly "useful", it has one purpose which is to complete puzzles but the entire purpose of a puzzle is that you do it yourself for fun, it's not a job or a task that needs to be performed in mass. how often will you have to solve a 5000 piece all white puzzle that you need to make a machine for it? who is in the market for this machine? so in that sense the journey really was the destination, the satisfaction of seeing the functioning machine comes from the hours and hours of manual labour and problem solving that went into making it. in the end the puzzle-solving machine is a puzzle itself- it's very complicated, it took a long time to finish, once it's finished it no longer has a purpose other than to exist, and the maker gains enjoyment from it's completion :)

    P BP BАй бұрын
  • That assembly time lapse was so satisfying

    TimeBucksTimeBucks2 ай бұрын
    • cool

      billy kidbilly kidАй бұрын
    • Foarte bine

      Vasile Marian GiarapVasile Marian GiarapАй бұрын
    • Nice

      তাল পাতার সিপাহিতাল পাতার সিপাহিАй бұрын
    • Very good

      Manuel Da SilvaManuel Da SilvaАй бұрын
    • Nice

      Shorts Only 0Shorts Only 0Ай бұрын
  • The amount of time you had to spend scanning the pieces must've been eye opening for you. Thinking about the sheer duration of it alone, my mind wanders off to the repetition of work people have to do in third world countries like China where they'll spent their entire day glued to a chair doing the same thing over and over and over and over again.

    We've got T r o u b l eWe've got T r o u b l eАй бұрын
  • I want to come back in a few years to see how this machine has been improved

    Marisa MorganMarisa MorganАй бұрын
  • I'm amazed at the approach you came up with to solve your all-white puzzle. Do you know that the German Frauenhofen Institute developed a similar computer program (ePuzzler) in 2003-2013 for the torn files of the State Security of the German Democratic Republic. But they had the problem that the torn edges partially overlapped. Unfortunately I couldn't find a website in English about it.

    M. PlewkaM. PlewkaАй бұрын
    • That's amazing!!!!! Did you know that US government officials had to manually reassemble and tape back together all the papers that Donald Trump ripped up during his presidency? Apparently he has a habit of tearing papers up when he's done with them, and unfortunately every single scrap of paper the president interacts with gets filed (like even a sticky note he doodles on absent-mindedly). Even after being informed multiple times that his habit was causing gross inefficiency for that department (not to mention turning your job into soul crushing, completely unsatisfying puzzle building), he still continued to do it. Sounds like they could have used that software (or Shane's!).

      SE GambleSE GambleАй бұрын
  • Bravo! I've been programming for decades and your approach to matching puzzle pieces was impressive. I have a slightly similar programming story. There are old text-based predecessors to MMORPGs called MUDs. Big online multiplayer text based games, loosely based on Dungeons & Dragons game mechanics. To oversimplify, the game worlds were a bunch of areas, each area having rooms connected NSEWUD. Areas were cities, forests, etc. Keep in mind these are text based games, so they don't really fit together spatially in rational ways like modern graphical MMORPGs. I wanted to dynamically build and store an ASCII art "map" of each area, every time the MUD server booted up, so it needed to be somewhat efficient. To do this, I picked one room to start from in an area, and recursively walked from there to all the rooms in the whole area, giving each room an x,y and z coordinate based on the path taken. Recursion has pitfalls, but it was easy. It made spaghetti look organized. At the center of a city area could be a city park, with many rooms in the park, but each road around the park's perimeter could consist of just one or two rooms. Coordinates for rooms overlapped and were pretty much useless. The solution I came up with was funny. I did recursive walks from all rooms as starting points, to all rooms (SIZE*SIZE; moar recursion!). This would make hundreds of sets of coordinates for every single room. Then I did the clever bit: (To avoid doing slow floating point math) I multiplied each room coordinate by the total number of rooms in the area squared (or cubed? it was a while ago) and then I just averaged each room's x's, y's and z's together. It worked 99% of the time. Some tricky areas with literal one way streets and such would be skewed, but that was no big deal. I was just happy it didn't slow down the server boot up too much.

    Chris BalfourChris BalfourАй бұрын
  • Great video. Would have done edge detection for the edge (case ;) pieces though, might have avoided the bug.

    moobsenmoobsenАй бұрын
  • Love your videos man. Being an engineer myself I spend half my time deciding whether a long, tedious task is worth automating or doing it manually because “I only have to do it once”. 99% of the time I should’ve spent the extra time automating. Keep these awesome projects coming, they are extremely entertaining! P.S. I am a logic designer and electrical engineer at Lockheed, if you ever need anything PM me

    Benny The DoodBenny The DoodАй бұрын
    • @Tim Klein It would also amount to making your program work correctly with the real world, imperfections and all.

      Fix It Again TonyFix It Again TonyКүн бұрын
    • @NoTrueScotsman But wouldn't that just amount to simulating in software what the rock polisher did to the real pieces?

      Tim KleinTim Klein3 күн бұрын
    • He could have easily smoothed the edges in software with a few lines of OpenCV

      NoTrueScotsmanNoTrueScotsmanАй бұрын
  • Some of the best videos on KZworld, hand down.

    Noah PalmerNoah PalmerАй бұрын
  • Man, I really think this was the best ending of all of your videos. I was laughing out so loud when I saw your facial expression after your wifes comment 🤣...

    Tom DietrichTom DietrichАй бұрын
  • Not only could a TV show never be able to produce a segment like this, it would never be as good. this is peak youtube. you took months and months to make a single segment, and its amazing

    GunhaverGunhaver2 ай бұрын
    • @pyropulse not quite, mythbusters could not afford to take months and all the budget to make a single episode. even mythbuster's larger episodes that had some hefty budget were super rushed compared to this video. it just doesn't make sense financially to spend so much time on a single video unless you are independent and sponsored. mythbusters didn't have any sponsors (as far as i know) and was beholden to the network and advertisers that bought slots on the show. if they took a few months to make a single insane episode, that would be months of no advertising revenue

      GunhaverGunhaver2 ай бұрын
    • How could a TV show never produce something like this? Is mythbusters not a TV that did similar stuff to this?

      pyropulsepyropulse2 ай бұрын
    • That's why I love channels like these. No drama, just fun. Even though he doesn't upload often you understand why and can appreciate all the hard work that's put into this stuff.

      Nutrition FactsNutrition Facts2 ай бұрын
  • impressive!!! reduced expectations are a good thing when trying to move forward. i am fairly certain you could go back and tweak all those lowered expectations up to 100% correct. lol. seriously your my hero

    Rotten RobertRotten RobertАй бұрын
  • My senior design project in computer science was solving puzzles with computer vision like this. Only instead of all the machinery, we assembled it all with software and made the completed product visible on a GUI. We were able to get up to 2000 piece puzzles with minimal errors. We didn't go for all white puzzles, but that is an interesting challenge. It's cool seeing the similarities and differences in how our software decomposed and solved the puzzle!

    Colin WoodsColin WoodsАй бұрын
  • Hi, I wonder if there is another way. I would like to try my own algorithm. Could you provide the pictures? I really don’t want to go through the same hell by making my own puzzle and scanning all pieces. Best regards

    Krass BassKrass BassАй бұрын
  • WOW mindblowing, I love your channel since the beginning !

    Börge JacobsenBörge JacobsenАй бұрын
  • You did an amazing puzzle assistant. Much better than a boring puzzle solver who can make it all alone and without knowing the power of friendship

    Victor PenteadoVictor Penteado2 ай бұрын
  • Awesome video! You should have a go at making a robot that can play the amazing game Klask, seems like it might be an interesting project

    Phil BreadcrumbsPhil BreadcrumbsАй бұрын
  • I’ll never not appreciate the amount of time, dedication and energy Shane puts into his videos🙏🏻🙏🏻 keep it up man! We all love it!

    Sage PetrichSage PetrichАй бұрын
  • I have been working on this initiative for over a year (not continuously of course). Now your video motivates me to pick the project up.

    Ruijie HeRuijie HeАй бұрын
  • I'm curious why you decided to remove the fuzzy edges from the (first) puzzle in realspace rather than recalculating the shapes to make them match.

    najahe 123najahe 123Ай бұрын
  • I am a programmer thinking "this guy does such cool stuff" as he says "you should consider becoming a programmer". I laughed out loud at that moment 😅

    Maksym BozhkoMaksym Bozhko2 ай бұрын
    • I tried programming in 2006-2007 . It can be cool when you come up with things. Like i made bubble sort before i knew it already existed. I used sin and cos to do 360 directions. I also was trying to solve the traveling salesman problem before i knew it was a thing. Most everything else was frustrating haha. Like when you're using too much Arduino memory regex'ing coordinates and it doesn't give you an error, it just doesn't work right.

      jackdonkey22jackdonkey222 ай бұрын
    • This sort of image processing I aspire to....But I gotta do it in C++/HLSL for flight simulators and I still can't wrap my head around it

      MVJBMVJB2 ай бұрын
    • Me too!

      Peter HowarthPeter Howarth2 ай бұрын
    • If you're a programmer, you probably think at one point: "I would have done it differently" and then "I am sure It would work better that way"... ^^

      Fig FoxFig Fox2 ай бұрын
    • @Cameron Dorson it was a joke, I assume :)

      NoNameNoName2 ай бұрын
  • This is exactly how I do puzzles. Note, I always get tasked with the solid colour sections. Lol

    Lyne LalondeLyne LalondeАй бұрын
  • You guys damn near frying your brain is why we have so much cool stuff. Thanks 👍🏾

    LouLouАй бұрын
  • 17:46 the simple answer is the first overlooked and often times the simple answer is the solution. Or at least a road to it. Look closely at the stacked pieces, they share at least one identical (or close enough to identical for the robotic eye) edge. Possibly eliminate this with a redundant position verification system maybe?

    Jay McClureJay McClureАй бұрын
  • Your presentation for algorithms and top holiday destinations with no robots made my day....

    Vishal PareekVishal PareekАй бұрын
  • As a programmer, I'm intrigued with the algorithmic possibilities that could be applied regarding your earlier data sets - do you have your various scan sets that others could play with to see if they can find clever ways to massage them into finding the connections?:

    Skylos SobakaSkylos Sobaka2 ай бұрын
    • @Philippe Deslongchamps He didn't discuss any amount of fuzzing and the impact of that approach in his algorithms.

      Skylos SobakaSkylos SobakaАй бұрын
    • It would be very interesting to see more people working with that first data set. it appears clearly than original scanning is not optimal, but the real interesting challenge is to find a way to deal with that, it would give a real life solution. Some iterations probably have to be done to adjust preprocessing and matching algorithm to find a solution that would be unique.

      benoit hautefeuillebenoit hautefeuille2 ай бұрын
    • I'm surprised he didn't just try simulating his puzzle solver with the digital version of the puzzle he generated, before he cut all the pieces out. That way all the pieces would be perfect, and he would have found the bugs before trying the solve with the physical pieces.

      Timothy JohnsonTimothy Johnson2 ай бұрын
    • Yeeeeesssssss let us try! We professional software engineers :) we gona smoothen those edges then allow for error % while comparing the edges!

      Philippe DeslongchampsPhilippe Deslongchamps2 ай бұрын
    • @IAmThe UsualGuy The devil is in the details with this kind of problem I think. In other words, the only way you'd know would be to try it. In fact iterate on it: think and build and repeat.

      82NeXus82NeXus2 ай бұрын
  • "If I wrote my code in something like C++ I would still be writing code - so I like this trade" - Best line of the year

    Tobias ArboeTobias ArboeАй бұрын
  • That's why tackling each of the sub problems formally first saves you a lot of migraines 😅

    Valery0p 5Valery0p 5Ай бұрын
  • Bro you just helped with my own vision project I didn’t realize I could just mark stuff out with lines

    Herobrine SnickersHerobrine SnickersАй бұрын
  • This is nothing less than incredible!

    Matthew RobbinsMatthew RobbinsАй бұрын
  • This is awesome! Also, I definitely learned something: Before spending hours of preparing my whole data set (or puzzle pieces) for a yet unproven algorithm (like matching sides that could fit together), make a quick test with reduced data set to see whether it works in principle :D

    FulmenifyFulmenifyАй бұрын
    • @Glenn edwards Sure, but your underlying assumption is that all errors must be solved at once. Starting small and then scaling stratifies the errors. So you get the basic model down, fix the big problems first, and then deal with problems that arise only at scale. Still, he did such a great job showing his whole process. The sheer level of persistence here is admirable.

      Mark JohnsonMark JohnsonАй бұрын
    • this is relevant not only for programming, but for everyday stuff, sometimes not even computer-related

      Сергей БобровСергей БобровАй бұрын
    • @Siberius WolfDefinitely. With his knowledge and experience, there’s no way he thought a regular cut puzzle would work perfectly. But it serves as an interesting progression plot + it’s good for educating the viewers.

      MertMertАй бұрын
    • @Glenn edwards It's true what you described in the end there. You have cases like that with virtual elements/data as well. But things like the algorithm finding no match at all, like in this video, because of fuzzy edges, you'd have detected with a really small subset of pieces (chosen wisely) as well. Also that the "smoothing fix" changed the shape too much, you'd have discovered a lot earlier. So I still think it's a valid and reasonable way to go about things, to make quick tests with a subset of data/pieces, before going big.

      FulmenifyFulmenifyАй бұрын
    • This approach works really well when dealing with virtual elements as long as the subset of test data represents all possible combinations you would come across. However it does not transfer well when dealing with real world physical elements as demonstrated here i.e. pieces shifting the duplication of coordinates leading to stacking etc. For example the latter problem is no doubt because the process lead to duplicate answers for the same piece so it placed it in the correct coordinates even though it had already solved it. This error would well not show up in a much smaller data set.

      Glenn edwardsGlenn edwardsАй бұрын
  • Love this man and his wife, awesome couple, brillant minds, beautiful sense of humour. Now truth be told😅, there must be a priority CIA, NSA or FBI list out there where these two birds are listed as priority humans for extraction and protection in case of alien invasion, extinction space threats, nuclear disasters etc etc.. 😂😅 God bless America 🇺🇸🇺🇸🇺🇸

    Ad ta tatum temporisAd ta tatum temporisАй бұрын
  • Never tired of watching your video! Could use some assistance if possible. I am a farmer in NE Indiana and I do a lot of field drainage tile. I have been looking for years for someone to build a small vehicle or robot with a camera and an under ground locator. This would need to be remote controlled. The purpose would be to drive unit up field tiles to map where they run or to find a blockage. I have contacted Purdue university and also multiple other universities along with hours of Google searches and phone calls with the same answer. It can't be done. Any help?

    #FarmerBill#FarmerBillАй бұрын
  • The physical world is so messy. That’s why I love programming games, where everything works 100% of the time and you never run into weird edge cases.

    BluishGreenProBluishGreenProАй бұрын
  • Seems the optimization could have been also on data formatting. - That is by creative negative offset represantation of piece where negative side of piece 1 should be matching the positive side. - Format the data where you simply look for your answer (positive match negative) However.... 4 sides. Your approach, singles to quads etc., is neat.

    Petr ihadtosignupforthisPetr ihadtosignupforthisАй бұрын
  • Legitimately the only creator who completely brightens my day when I see they’ve posted a new video. Love everything about this guy.

    soccer14blood08soccer14blood082 ай бұрын
    • same here

      iRouRouiiRouRoui7 күн бұрын
  • 3:22 "Thank goodness I only have to do it once." Why do I feel like this _can't_ age well? 11:17 "Thank goodness I only have to do it twice" 12:35 "Thank goodness I only have to do it three times" 15:30 "Thank goodness I only have to do this four times"

    Gun_Down_GreenwoodGun_Down_GreenwoodАй бұрын
  • During the assembly, numerous pieces are placed by the device in stand alone locations. If the designed process is to compare sides and identify matches, how does the drive know where to place pieces with no match in stand alone locations?

    C SC SАй бұрын
  • Well done sir! But, you never said anywhere how long the algorithm took to solve it? (In terms of raw compute time, not wall time.) Or did I miss this somewhere?

    Excalibur's EngineeringExcalibur's EngineeringАй бұрын
  • Damn, this Austin Powers guy is really smart. Well done!

    Knowledgeable GoyKnowledgeable GoyАй бұрын
  • I'M SLOWLY GOING TOTALLY INSANE...lol. Nothing short of amazing projects on this channel. Hats off to you sir. Very impressive, educational, and inspirational project as usual. Your drive is something of wonder. Thank you.

    J WasemanJ WasemanАй бұрын
    • "is my dog allowed to start a youtube channel"

      Sage TXSage TX22 күн бұрын
    • Also TOP VACATION DESTINATION S WITH NO ROBOTS 😂

      BackpackerIndianBackpackerIndianАй бұрын
    • 1313

      Ryan GrayRyan GrayАй бұрын
    • ok

      truong trantruong tranАй бұрын
    • ok

      duong chucduong chucАй бұрын
  • Love the video. It's actually the flaws and the problem solving that made me stick around. You did really well. But I do hope that you get those bugs fixed and help the machine / program work more smoothly. What satisfaction it would give if you were able to pull it off without human intervention. Lastly... the wife thing is really hilarious. All that work and your wife is like 'meh'. Makes you want to implode. Totally relatable. Good job and more power to you.

    Vanjester LazamVanjester LazamАй бұрын
    • i wonder what her MBTI is

      iRouRouiiRouRoui7 күн бұрын
    • it's just an "act", he said it in one of his videos (the wall painting one), she's awsome

      iRouRouiiRouRoui7 күн бұрын
  • Maybe vibrating the table could slot some of those pieces into place? Or adding a "probe" to push the piece down after dropping it might also help

    mardevmardevАй бұрын
  • Wow! You've got be a super brainiac to figure out how to make the computer learn to solve this puzzle! Both the hardware and the software.

    David HoDavid HoАй бұрын
  • I love this Chanel and the way he shows the problem & then find the solution for them !!! Hat off!!

    Elham DElham DАй бұрын
  • Somehow this is both the funniest and most educational channel I watch on the regular. "That takes about eight hours, so I'm glad I only have to do it [number] times!" had me cracking up harder each time

    L. Y.L. Y.2 ай бұрын
    • +

      Campfire BanditCampfire Bandit2 ай бұрын
    • As soon as he said it twice I immediately knew it wasn't the last either.

      ShootLieghShootLiegh2 ай бұрын
    • @Gary Lewisi get the same but isn't it annoying because then it's like "Well don't f**king ask then" 🤦😂...

      No nameNo name2 ай бұрын
    • Same. The first time he repeated it, I smiled. The 2nd time, I audibly chuckled. The 3rd time, I laughed loudly enough my wife asked me what I was watching. I tried to explain. She just looked at me funny.

      Gary LewisGary Lewis2 ай бұрын
  • Do you make a G-code interpreter for your CNC projects?

    Mohammed Sufyan RizviMohammed Sufyan RizviАй бұрын
  • Great video your skill and patience are next level. I wonder if a vacuum table would help pieces not move

    GeneGeneАй бұрын
    • I think the biggest problem is when they get shoved. I suspect the arm will always win over any vacuum.

      alvamigaalvamigaАй бұрын
  • "Thank goodness I only have to do this one time" "Thank goodness I only have to do this two times" "Thank goodness I only have to do this three times" "Thank goodness I only have to do this four times"

    Henry FoutzHenry FoutzАй бұрын
  • What a job !!!! You need to have sort of a rolling pin to flatten your pieces.

    SupersonicHBSupersonicHBАй бұрын
  • The fact that you are so raw when you talk about you struggles is incredibly motivating. It's really hard to imagine the amount of work and worries and trial and error that go into projects like these when you see the finiahed product. So for that : a big massive thank you.

    kukicukukicu2 ай бұрын
    • And the fact that “big brain” people sometimes forget to say idk…renew the warehouse lease!! 😂

      Paul RPaul R2 ай бұрын
  • You could have used a kernel method to smooth the edges of the puzzle pieces images. This would have solved the problem. You didn't need to make your own puzzle with clearly delineated edges.

    posthocpriorposthocpriorАй бұрын
  • Since many manufacturers use specific cutting dies for their puzzles, can you cheat and have your algorithm check to see if the puzzle matches a known die in order to greatly speed up processing times in subsequent runs.

    Tristan CTristan CАй бұрын
  • You should've first made the puzzle robot to solve an image puzzle, so that you would've gained experience or failed faster and also at least you would've known where the problem happened. But anyways, love your content.

    Abdul MunimAbdul MunimАй бұрын
  • I should think that it might have been interesting to have left the picture on the jigsaw. It gives you the opportunity to quickly and easily check if the computer was 100% accurate, using the amazing facility - eyesight.

    Simon PetersSimon PetersАй бұрын
  • I admire not only your genius, but also your ability to explain very advanced concepts in simple to comprehend ways, and your honesty about your mistakes. Fantastic work!

    SjaardaSjaarda2 ай бұрын
    • There might have been genius in some earlier video, but not in this one...

      AshiStarshadeAshiStarshade2 ай бұрын
  • Ah great now I'm just going to see puzzles as recursive issues, solve a 2x2 many many times, then a 4x4 less many many times then...a 4000x4000 once...

    Clara - ThistleBlueClara - ThistleBlueАй бұрын
  • First of all: Mad respect for all the work you did and sharing it with us! :)) Secondly: WHY oh WHY did you use a 4000 (!!) piece puzzle while developing your solving technique? Wouldn't a 40 or even 400 piece puzzle make the process sooo much faster?

    Geert SchuringGeert SchuringАй бұрын
  • 16:25 "If at first you don't succeed, reduce your expectations until your a success" 😂

    JordanJordanАй бұрын
  • The practical application for this, for reassembling things that broke apart. Plane crashes, unplanned rapid disassemblies, etc..

    Matt SouthMatt SouthАй бұрын
  • This is one of your best episodes. Not only for the engineering project, but also for adding some philosophy / poetry perls like: "If at first you don't succeed, reduce your expectations until you're a success" or "There is something poetic on two pieces missing".

    Nuno MNuno M2 ай бұрын
    • Pearls*

      I like chinese tea especially jasmine tea.I like chinese tea especially jasmine tea.2 ай бұрын
  • I love all the little easter eggs in this video!

    A Rock.A Rock.Ай бұрын
  • I love your wife's line! That's what mine always says too. Must be genetic

    cantcomeupwithauserncantcomeupwithausernАй бұрын
  • I did a similar program algorithm to solve a game of boggle. The brute force way of solving a board is an option, but not efficient, nor cool. If you pick a starting block, it only touches at most 4 other valid paths. If the path has letters that aren't possible to be a word, cancel the path. It's a word hash table sorta thing, like GPS uses to make a route. I had a file of words I acquired that was basically a dictionary dumped into a txt file. Also at the time, would solve a board in under a second, and this was years ago. It was cool to play the computer, but I'd never beat it, mainly because my vocabulary wasn't near what the computer had in that text file. It's a fun project, you get file I/O, recursion, matching, and efficiency practice. Cool video.

    10ktube10ktubeАй бұрын
  • You solved this impossible puzzle in 4 months rather than 10+ years. Technology is awesome

    Tyson ZelmerTyson ZelmerАй бұрын
  • Increíble video; even got teary eyed in the Timelapse part

    Hilario MenendezHilario MenendezАй бұрын
  • 12:00 is a really annoying problem for regular puzzle solving too. Revensburger puzzles are nice and crisp

    OMGWTFITSOMGWTFITSАй бұрын
  • I am a Software Engineer and i am going to show this video to some friends and family if they ever ask me again why the computer/software is not doing what they want. To tell a program to do exactly how it should be is hard to imagine. For the human mind its so obvious and yet a program needs some help to understand what you are trying to do. Awesome project! You are the best!

    JoeJoeАй бұрын
    • @Alexander Trowell I enjoyed the bits where the computer was finding no matches for anything. This is the point where you realise what a pedant a computer is and it does exactly what you tell it with no regard for what you wanted it to do. 😆

      alvamigaalvamigaАй бұрын
    • I like how he said at the end "explain to computers in excruciating detail what to do". People forget the excruciating detail part. It's amazing how many ways you can mess up a seemingly simple feature.

      Alexander TrowellAlexander TrowellАй бұрын
  • I think he is arguably the most brilliant guy on youtube.

    BrettBrettАй бұрын
  • What I like about you is you aren't afraid to admit your mistakes. You actually embrace them and let people know what went wrong or why things didn't work. Some people out there pretend they are so smart and get everything perfect on the first try everytime. Thanks for being real

    S LS L2 ай бұрын
  • At the end there were apparently 2 missing pieces. BUT - when the software was trying to match edges, at 9:49, it said there were 4002 pieces. I think the view of the jigsaw at 17:32 shows that it's 80 pieces wide, hence 80*50=4000, rather than 69*58=4002 or 87*46=4002. So maybe Shane accidentally scanned a couple of them twice?

    StewartIainRobertsonStewartIainRobertsonАй бұрын
    • @Okay DETar Maybe he's a slow counter. If at first you dont succeed, lower you expectations until you fully counted.

      Robin ErikRobin Erik20 күн бұрын
    • @freewilly1193 He just had to count to 133, I doubt that took him two weeks

      Okay DETarOkay DETar21 күн бұрын
    • @freewilly1193 Or maybe he just saw this video at a different time like everyone does? youtube comment section is filled with morons

      PointBlankPointBlankАй бұрын
    • @punkalypso geez dude if it took you 2 weeks to count it, take the w, you need it. Also neither of you noticed that between the two time stamps there was a switch of puzzles? Just take your w, man, you really need that thing.

      freewilly1193freewilly1193Ай бұрын
    • Clearly you didn't actually count. You just waited for me to do it ;-) It's 87x46. Also, if he had 4 malformed pieces he only had to scan 3998, so that's something to think about. And then you wonder how he accounted for those in his algorithm?

      punkalypsopunkalypsoАй бұрын
  • This is beyond amazing ...

    szybaksszybaksАй бұрын
  • I agree, you didn't 100% build a puzzle solving robot, but you built something that the build process itself made it worthwhile.

    mike11986mike11986Ай бұрын
  • It could have been done in no time by the algo if the puzzle was digital!

    Himesh BeheraHimesh BeheraАй бұрын
  • Gotta love the absolute gems he drops in on his computer screen in the background.

    Mason PriceMason PriceАй бұрын
    • I am slowly going totally insane

      Carl LeisegangCarl Leisegang24 күн бұрын
    • Same lol

      Mason PriceMason PriceАй бұрын
    • Lol top vacation spots without robots was my favorite lol

      Jelani ThomasJelani ThomasАй бұрын
    • Totally Insane

      HiVizCamoHiVizCamoАй бұрын
  • Your wife is a gem. Thanks Bob

    Robert McDonnoldRobert McDonnoldАй бұрын
  • I think my wife would have said something like "I thought you did something cool, like in the youtube videos you watch"🤣

    Rafael KarosuoRafael KarosuoАй бұрын
  • Regarding that last column, isn't the number of columns divisible by 4?

    VoltZero83VoltZero83Ай бұрын
  • You should definitely keep at this problem, but make it a side project.

    Spencer MorganSpencer MorganАй бұрын
  • As an automation engineer this blew me away. Keep doing crazy stuff like this!

    Joseph DeGraffenriedJoseph DeGraffenried2 ай бұрын
    • @-.- The true clown is you, thinking we should preserve repetitive jobs that can easily be replaced and free a person to do something of much more value with their life.

      Eric SmartmanEric Smartman2 ай бұрын
    • @polerin a part of the problem is these large companies like Amazon or Tesla, they will use their employees until they break and then replace them, all they care about is the profit. If rather than replace or get rid of the employees when they automate then they train them up to maintain the machines then it would be nearly the same issue, the problem is the companies just get rid of them, rather than give them the skills to still be useful.

      Conor StewartConor Stewart2 ай бұрын
    • @Conor Stewart honestly we are approaching some of that as it is, but even before we get to a breaking point in terms of "can't get jobs" we are facing the fact that automation is pushing all of the benefits of work to the owning class and leaving the people actually doing the work in the dust. Look up the difference in productivity vs average income vs cost of living over the last several decades. It's heartbreaking.

      polerinpolerin2 ай бұрын
    • @Zte Axon 7 "People shouldn't be against automation" isn't exactly recognizing the real issue at play (as you sort of note later). I mean, I'm a programmer. Half of what I do is working on automating annoying things so people can be more effective. The problem is that the benefits of this automation only flow to the company, and are not really shared with the workers.

      polerinpolerin2 ай бұрын
    • @Joseph DeGraffenried I'm on my Android and I don't see it.

      Paul Anthony VildPaul Anthony Vild2 ай бұрын
KZworld