There are a lot of misconceptions about all of this, especially the mechanism by which psychostimulants alleviate the symptoms of ADHD.

There was a video posted awhile ago about an explanation of Adderall might work: by keeping dopamine in the synapse longer . I showed it to my dad and he immediately said "that idea was dismissed in the 70's. This isn't true or even all that modern."

The main question should be "why would a stimulant help a person with ADHD slow down and focus? How does that make sense?" And on the surface, it doesn't. But what if, and give me some time to explain this, the medications didn't act as stimulants? What if they acted as something else? As some background, out of all the stimulants we have at our disposal, there are only two that have any effectiveness in treating ADHD: amphetmamines and methylphenidate (and methamphetamine, but that is usually a last option treatment for obvious reasons). These molecules have a property called chirality, which means that even though they're connected the same way, they are oriented differently in space, like mirror images. The most common analogy is the human hand: they are exactly the same but mirror images (a right hand won't fit in a left glove). Anyway, only 3 of these forms have shown benefit for those with ADHD: both R- and S-amphetamine, and R-threo-methylphenidate. So, amongst all the stimulants we know, only two have shown any benefit for ADHD treatment and, of those two, only three of the six isomers show any efficacy. So we're talking a very narrow range here.

Now, if these drugs worked by central nervous system stimulation, theoretically any stimulant should work right? But they don't. Case in point: caffeine. Anyone with ADHD will tell you caffeine doesn't help. So what else could be happening? The theory my father subscribes to is one of a so-called "replacement model," where people with ADHD are deficient in a naturally occurring molecule and the medication will mimic that molecule as a replacement. For instance, there is a testing program called TOVA which is used to test a person's attention. Patients with ADHD will usually score very low when compared to the general populace. However, if you give the patient 5 mg of an ADHD medication, their scores jump. Give them 10 mg, it will jump even more. Give them 15 mg, even more. Remarkably, these jumps are linear in fashion. This is where it gets interesting: it only happens up to a certain point. After a certain dosage, the scores begin to drop off dramatically. If a person's optimal dose is 20mg, by the time they're taking 40mg, they're actually doing worse than they were doing without any medication at all. If they worked by a stimulation mechanism, then the more you gave somebody the better they would do. But this isn't the case. This is similar to a person with diabetes who doesn't produce enough insulin. If you don't give them enough, it won't be effective. Give them too much, there will be health hazards. Give them just the right amount and they will function normally. And this is what ADHD medications do: allow the patient to function like a person with a typical nervous system. Pills don't give skills. They are a means by which to even the playing field.

So, if we assume that they act as a replacement/supplement for a naturally occurring molecule, where does it act? A lot of people think it is the prefrontal cortex which is associated with attention and so this would be the place that ADHD medications operate. But this may not be true either. It a very interesting experiment performed in the early 1990s (I'm a little iffy on the time period, I can find the paper if people are interested), a doctor was interested in where the main area of action was for methylphenidate. To determine this, she "radiolabeled" methylphenidate, meaning that one atom in the molecule was replaced by a radioactive isotope and when it decayed, it could be detected measured. After creating this special version of methylphenidate, she injected it directly into the carotid artery of volunteers. What she found was that it accumulated almost exclusively in a part of the brain called the corpus striatum. According to Wikipedia, the corpus striatum is associated with "multiple aspects of cognition, including motor and action planning,decision-making, motivation, reinforcement, and reward perception."

All of these things play a role in ADHD.

So if the ADHD brain is deficient in a molecule that acts upon the corpus striatum, it's activity will decrease and all of the above aspects will be impaired.

This is a very basic version of this.

Cover Image

So tonight I've been hit with this ostensibly easy to answer question. Anvils - crafted to temper blades and other metal goods - were created to be utilized as part of a forge and never waver in intense heats.

So where did they all go?

Anvils are no longer needed for most manufacturing, as they have been replaced with technologies such as hydraulic presses that shape metal far more quickly. However, anvils are still made today and the most prized Anvils for modern smiths are those that have been in use for decades pr, in some cases, over a century. If you were to look around on ebay or at an estate sale or two, you'll likely find there are plenty of Anvils to be found.

As for the workings: the metal being smithed was heated for an extended period of time inside the forge, while the anvil just had to have hot metal placed on it temporarily while it was beaten. Metal is a good conductor of heat and there is a lot of anvil to soak up the heat from the relatively small bit of metal. There is no way a little piece could carry enough heat over to get the anvil hot enough to get soft.

Anvils are just chunks of iron, not particularly special or difficult to melt down into something else.

Go to an estate sale in farm country or an auction at an old timers place after he passed away and you'll see anvils. Welding shops have them, still useful in some aspects. I've seen them as boat anchors, door stops and counter weights for many rigged up contraptions.

Anvils that are no longer needed are excellent scrap metal. Steel is worth big money and scrap steel is bought by weight so you can imagine they get recycled plenty. Iron and steel can be melted down and recycled any number of times.


Cassette tapes are making a comeback, particularly for artists in subgenres like vaporwave and lo-fi hip hop, which both embrace the sounds of tape warble and vintage recording anomalies, as well as the revival of the lost art of making mixtapes. Yet 8 tracks were a horrible format: lots of tape hiss, they jammed often, the tracking was hard to coordinate so that they often had to change 'tracks' in the middle of song with a delay and mechanical clunk.

The problem with any large scale production is that cassette decks aren't being made as often anymore (if at all), so when you spend $8 on a cassette it's likely that some old cassette deck will ruin it. But people still have cassette decks in older cars and home stereos, so it's worth the risk to immerse oneself in nostalgia. (The same cannot be said for 8-tracks, where working 8 track decks are harder to come by and the playback of music leaves little to be desired.) Record players are still readily available, as well as pretty affordable... and they look great in a home stereo setup. They're also more easily repairable, unlike a cassette deck which has many internal moving parts that can destroy your cassette ribbon.

Vinyl is much more marketable. Artists these days don't make much on digital music sales, therefore by pairing a physical copy of their music that the listener can actually touch and feel with some nice artwork, they are more likely to make that sale (and will often times give a digital copy for free). Listeners get to own the album that sounds far better than a compressed Mp3, they're supporting the artist, they're supporting local record shops; manufacturers are happy, record label is happy... it's a win/win/win/win on all sides.

TL:DR - Vinyl is more aesthetically pleasing than 8 tracks or cassettes, a better investment for audiophiles and a better monetary return for artists and labels, and record players are a more reliable instrument for playback than cassette players or 8 track players.

I love this quote by Brian Eno:

“Whatever you now find weird, ugly, uncomfortable and nasty about a new medium will surely become its signature. CD distortion, the jitteriness of digital video, the crap sound of 8-bit - all of these will be cherished and emulated as soon as they can be avoided. It’s the sound of failure: so much modern art is the sound of things going out of control, of a medium pushing to its limits and breaking apart. The distorted guitar sound is the sound of something too loud for the medium supposed to carry it. The blues singer with the cracked voice is the sound of an emotional cry too powerful for the throat that releases it. The excitement of grainy film, of bleached-out black and white, is the excitement of witnessing events too momentous for the medium assigned to record them.”

I love it when old films get a touch of color. Or when the black and white photo of a long deceased relatives.

Black and white film and negatives do not respond to all colors with the same intensity. They are far more sensitive to green light for instance than blue light so how bright an object appears in an image will give you a clue as to how the 3 primary colors might have been. This only gives an artist some working impressions they can use when coloring the image.

As far as whether we guess or know for certain, we do a fair bit of research because we are just as interested as the viewer in seeing something brought to life in a realistic way. But for the most part it's artistic interpretation and guessing.

There are people who do artistic tinting of monochrome images and they may go for aesthetics rather than accuracy but your question seems to be about restorations.

What's interesting is that we also do this with color photographs sometimes because of unequal fading, age related tinting, and incorrect development.

For instance a lot of people shot film on Kodak Instamatic cameras back in the 70's and a lot of those pictures developed a strong red tint as they aged. One of the first experiences I had in coloring and color fixing photographs was in restoring old family photos which were almost completely lacking in blue and green.

In a color photograph sometimes this can be accomplished by adjusting the hue and color levels but sometimes you get a better looking result by rendering down to a greyscale image, and then tinting everything by hand.

For instance this is an old photo is partially restored after the emulsions aged, the green and blue faded far more than the red and the result is basically a red tinted black and white photo. The desired outcome was a photo that looked like one of the victorian era hand colored plates so I went with that aesthetic rather than strict accuracy.


Why are retro colors associated with the colors Blue and Pink? It seems like every generation has them. For example in the 80s electric blue and neon pink were hot. Not to mention neon green.

Today we even associate these terrible colors with a vintage look.

So what makes a color eligible for vintage?

They were popular colors in the 80s, in pastel and neon form. For example, one of the most popular TV shows of the 80s was Miami Vice, which became very influential in terms of fashion and music. Its logo was a neon pink and pale blue sign and it embraced a pastel pink and blue look. The rise of synth-pop, electronic music, sci-fi blockbusters, video games, computers, etc popularised a sci-fi/technological look which was full of neon glow and intense colors, compared to the more natural and earthy 70s style full of orange, brown, and deep green. Synth pop, sci-fi, video games, etc obviously all existed before the 80s, but the 80s was when they became a massive cultural trend that everyone experienced.

Miami Vice was probably the single biggest factor in those particular colours becoming iconic, though. It was a massive massive hit and a lot of 80s parodies today are parodying it specifically. Ever play Grand Theft Auto: Vice City? It's basically GTA: Miami Vice, there's so much of it in there -- the Miami setting (they don't call it Miami in the game but it very obviously is), the character designs, direct references to events and characters from the show, the same soundtrack choices. That was one of the most successful games of all time and half the people who played it don't remember the 80s. Or the show Black Mirror, which had its famous 80s episode last year? The creator said he watched a season of Miami Vice for inspiration. Miami Vice was as big and influential in the 80s as Friends was in the 90s. I don't know if there's any modern equivalent to that.

It doesn't do pink and blue but a lot of other 80s aesthetic is embodied by Tron, a Disney "we're in a computer" adventure from '82, the music videos of Michael Jackson and Madonna, and iconic movies like Ferris Bueller's Day Off and Top Gun.

As you can see when a color becomes associated with a certain time it takes on a vintage nature later on. It is simply because those were the prevalent colors in the 80's. Just like the 70's were known for olive, rust orange, and goldenrod.


I have been into gaming my whole life.

Retro and independent game stores and almost all of them fall into 1 of 2 categories.

  • great stock of items in great condition for ridiculous prices.
  • absolute disgusting shithole full of hidden gems for good prices if you can find them in the endless, disorganized piles.

Both styles of store have their place but I prefer the stores that are a hybrid between the two. The overpriced stores never budge on their pricing and this bothers me. They never have sales and they never have coupons or deals. The owners all seem to be out of touch with gaming in general and are only interested in having you make a purchase and leave.

My favorite stores have staff/owners that are clearly passionate about gaming and seem to actually care about me. When I walk into a place and the guy remembers what we talked about last time or he asks me if I played , for example fallout 4, that goes a long way with me. When I'm looking at buying multiple items they will go " okay fuck it man. If you want to grab both those games I'll throw in the genesis controller for free or $10 or something". I'm not always looking for the cheapest price or for freebies but the little things go a long way for me.

Another great thing is when a retro game store calls you when something comes in. I mentioned to my favorite store a while back I was looking for some n64 controllers and a few weeks later he called me and told me he got some in. This is awesome. In a world where I can order anything I could ever want online you have to draw me in with service. Things like this keep me loyal to certain stores.

Another thing I feel is important is to have a culture form around your store. If you have the room setup a tv/monitor with some systems or grab an arcade machine or two. It's pretty cool to be able to stop into a place, play some mvc2 on the cabinet with someone else at the store or a friend I'm with then grab something from the store. Some stores have gaming tournaments with gift cards or other swag for prizes. A local store hosts DR Mario tournaments all the time and at any point you can walk in the store an challenge the owner . If you can beat him you get a prize.

Most retro gamers are modern gamers. Maybe 10% of the retro crowd are retro "purists." If I come to you for my NES/Genesis/SNES games, chances are, I'll come to you for FFXV and Fallout 4. If you can't provide those, not only have you lost the sale of those games, but anything I may have seen while in your store "Oh, is that a CIB Final Fantasy III? How much is that?"

Anything to get people in your store is potential profit. Not making money is the same as losing it. Be a gaming store that carries retro products (or even specializes in them,) not a retro gaming store. If I have to go to your store for Sunset Riders, then drive across town to Gamestop/Wal Mart for Halo 5, I'm probably just gonna go on Amazon.

My local shop carries tons of stuff, and I'll go in there twice a month just to browse. They have everything from Atari to PS4. They also carry Blue Rays, Anime, Action Figures, Posters & Wall Scrolls, Keychains, Stickers, Video Game Themed Candy, Clone Consoles and custom cases/ dust sleeves.

Basically, any time I have an urge to chase a nerdy wild-hair, I know that they can help me.

I've went in there with the intention to browse and come out with $300 worth of stuff, on multiple occasions.