My first thought at seeing something pretty in so few bytes was: “perhaps you could just run through every value in each of those 484 bytes and find other gems in there too” then I did the math - or tried to… :)
You don't need to go anywhere near 400 bytes to find inscrutable programs, if your programming language is concise enough. Even 8 bytes, or 64 bits to be precise, offers plenty unchartered territory for finding new gems in lambda calculus [1], one such recent discovery being a 49 bit program whose output exceeds Graham's number.
Check out the BBC micro version in 432 chars (443 bytes). https://bbcmic.ro/?t=9ctpk ... That cuts your problem down by a factor of ~5.5e98. ;) Or even a lot more if you limit to readable ascii. I'd be curious if you did that how many of the tries would result in a valid runnable program.
I have the authors Programming Atari 2600 Games and really enjoyed it. I started my professional programming career programming in Assembler on an OS/360 mainframe back in the mid 90s and it really helped me starting out at such a low level. It was enjoyable revisiting Assembler while going through his book.
https://www.shadertoy.com/
https://www.pouet.net/
The last demo party was this one: https://www.pouet.net/party.php?which=1550&when=2024
And this is 64K: https://www.pouet.net/prod.php?which=96589
Something out of this world.