One thing that we’ve heard for many years in covering a variety of ridiculous civil and criminal court cases is the belief that when a crazy case is filed, the person accused of wrongdoing should “just walk into court and tell the judge what really happened.” While that might feel right, it’s really not how these things work. There is a procedure, and having an actual lawyer who understands how things work is incredibly valuable.
When we first wrote about “Reckless” Ben Schneider and his valiant attempt to help Bryan Mansell get back the Lego sets (and/or money) he was owed from the company Bricks & Minifigs, we mentioned that almost everyone in the dispute should have talked to lawyers earlier in the process than they did. We had a lot of people get mad at us for making that claim, but I stand by it. Especially after Schneider has dropped Part 3 (after a federal court fixed the extremely problematic injunction from a state court that had blocked him from releasing it originally), and it again shows why Schneider really needs to hire a lawyer.
As lots of people are rightly noting, the video itself shows a ton of pretty sketchy behavior by Bricks & Minifigs and the cops — police walking a witness through how to invent charges while mocking Schneider, and Bricks & Minifigs caught telling wildly different stories depending on who was listening. And then, right on schedule, after the video came out Bricks & Minifigs followed it up with a new blog post on Friday that somehow makes things worse.
Advertisement
Schneider certainly knows how to make pretty viral video content, but representing himself in court seems particularly stupid, especially as he’s doing it here in a criminal case. He is right that the deck is stacked against him and that the prosecutors and the judge don’t seem to be listening to him or taking his claims seriously, but that’s in large part because he’s bumbling into court without a lawyer, and when he’s being asked fundamental procedural questions is telling the judge “have you looked at the evidence we submitted?”
Again, this might feel like the right way to handle a case where you feel you’re being railroaded, but procedurally, the court isn’t supposed to be looking at the evidence at this stage of the case, so Schneider making out like the court is treating him unfairly just misses the point that basically any lawyer could have told him regarding how cases like this proceed.
That’s not to defend the prosecutors, the police, or Bricks & Minifigs. While the video is (again) only showing Schneider’s side of the story, there are a whole bunch of things in the video that are incredibly damning to all three.
Let’s go through a few key points: First up: what the cops told Schneider about the charges against him, and what they were actually hiding.
Advertisement
Schneider plays some audio from one of the criminal cases against him (it’s a little unclear which one, since he suggests it’s the case in American Fork, but a screenshot he shows briefly suggests it may be the other case in Provo), where he says that the prosecutor and the court won’t even share what he’s being charged with, though the video clips don’t show that. Rather they show prosecutors trying to get out of providing body cam footage in discovery to Schneider, claiming that they’re upset he’ll make video commentary out of it. Discovery of evidence is not the same as knowing what the charges are, even if the evidence is related to the charges.
Even so, the claim is bullshit. The fact that Schneider might create public commentary with the videos is no excuse for not providing discovery. If that’s the concern, prosecutors can seek to have a protective order put over how the discovery materials are used, and if Schneider violates that order, then he could face contempt charges. Simply denying discovery is ridiculous.
But it’s the second case, out of Provo, where the bodycam footage stops looking like sloppy policing and starts looking like something much more problematic. Schneider was able to obtain bodycam footage from the police who were handling the charges against him based on statements from Bricks & Minifigs’ CEO Ammon McNeff. Again, we’re only seeing the evidence as selected and edited by Schneider, but it’s difficult to see how there’s anything else that would exonerate how the Provo police acted here.
They literally have one police officer talking to McNeff (repeatedly), talking about how McNeff’s original claim of extortion isn’t supported by the evidence but offering to help him find some other charges, and then asking McNeff to confirm specific elements to turn it into commercial obstruction. The police officer’s quote here is deeply problematic:
Advertisement
“We agree that there really was no extortion code that would fit your situation, however, you know, at the end of the day, we do want to help you guys so you’re not having to deal with this fool… [sigh]… all his issues. We did find that there was another code that fit and it’s called aggravated commercial obstruction….”
Having the police call Schneider a “fool” and saying they want to help find charges that will stick is not great. They then walk McNeff through what they need him to say/do to get such charges, including claiming that he asked Schneider to leave the Bricks & Minifigs premises multiple times and Schneider refused. Schneider shows his own video recordings (and security footage) that appears to directly contradict this — specifically showing that when asked to leave they did so.
There is one point where McNeff asks them to leave but then keeps talking to them anyway, so that almost certainly doesn’t count as a legitimate request to leave. And none of the footage Schneider shares matches even remotely what McNeff told the police. There is footage of Schneider (stupidly) saying “we can do this the easy way or the hard way,” which is not fatal to Schneider’s argument, but can certainly be read as a threat. In all these videos, that’s the one point that isn’t great for Schneider, though in the full context it’s pretty clearly a threat to release more videos and publicly shame Bricks & Minifigs. Still, that line hurts Schneider’s argument a bit.
McNeff also tells the police that Schneider threatened to burn the offices down, even though in their own civil lawsuit against him they admit that various threats have not come from Schneider directly but from some of his fans online. If Schneider had directly threatened them, you’d think they would have included that in the civil complaint. While most of the video evidence has only been selectively released, at this point not a single bit of evidence shows Schneider actually threatening any sort of violence towards Bricks & Minifigs (indeed, it seems that his whole schtick is to sort of do the dopey, hapless, inquisitor thing).
Based on the current evidence, it sure looks like McNeff just lied to the cops, and the cops not only took his side, but helped nudge McNeff about what he should say or do to give them enough to charge Schneider.
Advertisement
Not great!
Even worse, when the same cop figures out what they can charge them with, the body cam footage shows her laughing with glee. You kinda have to watch the clip directly (starting at 16:15) where the cop gets kinda gleeful that McNeff told her enough to charge Schneider with a second degree felony (Schneider falsely calls it a “secondary” felony). This is actually two separate clips from Schneider’s video, though it sounds like they’re directly connected to one another:
Cop: However, the tricky thing is is that we have to prove that this individual either entered or remains unlawfully on the premise. When he came to the property, did you have to ask him more than once to leave?
McNeff: Yes.
Cop: Okay.
McNeff: You know, ‘we’re not leaving until we we get it.’ …
[other video interspersed before cutting back to this exchange]
McNeff (trying to reconstruct the scene for the cop): ‘Guys, at this point, I’ve asked you to leave. Please leave.’ ‘Well, we we you know, like you have to listen to us. You have to pay us this money.’ ‘No, guys, you need to leave and you’re not leaving.’ Like, but I asked multiple times. They did not leave.
Cop: Looks like that might be a second degree felony. [laughs joyfully] He’s facing felony charges. It is a felony…
That is all… pretty damning. Later the same cop mocks Schneider’s first video: “I’m really curious if this fool makes any money doing this YouTube stuff?” Even later, she says to McNeff “well, I’ll keep my fingers crossed for you. Hopefully no more issues” and “there’s so many other things that this guy could be talking about, right?” Just completely supporting McNeff and dismissing Schneider’s side entirely.
Though I will note that Schneider also has a misunderstanding that “reporting a crime” (as he tries to do with McNeff) is “opening a case.” While police can investigate claims of a crime, until a prosecutor charges it, there is no actual “case.”
Advertisement
But it does seem overwhelmingly clear, from what’s presented in this video at least, that the police immediately believed and sided with McNeff and dismissed/ignored everything Schneider presents in response… to the point that they sent a subpoena to Google seeking a bunch of Schneider’s emails, communications, and other documents. There’s a suggestion in the video that McNeff got Schneider to email him just to get his email for the sake of the subpoena, though it seems clear that McNeff had other means of getting Schneider’s email address. Schneider points out that he emailed via the website contact form and had received a reply from someone at Bricks & Minifigs. And while McNeff acts like he’s never heard of that email address and it has nothing to do with him, that’s clearly bullshit, and he could easily talk to whatever employee manages that account to get Schneider’s email address.
Set the criminal case aside for a second, because there’s a parallel thread here that’s just as bad for the company: McNeff’s own claims about the inventory list don’t survive contact with reality. McNeff tells Schneider that he’ll happily share the inventory they did of the store they took over if he sends an email to the one specific address, and says he told Mansell the same thing. However, when Schneider emails that address and follows up, he receives this reply:
If you can’t read that, it says:
Mr. Schneider,
BAM Franchising, Inc. will not participate in any form of communication that appears designed for public provocation, harassment, or manipulation of facts for the purpose of media content.
Attempts to obtain privileged or confidential information through misrepresentation or the creation of fraudulent documents may constitute criminal misconduct, and we reserve all rights to refer such behavior to appropriate legal authorities.
Should you believe you are entitled to any specific information under applicable law, we suggest that you pursue such requests through formal and lawful legal procedures.
This will serve as our final response to your inquiry unless we are contacted by duly retained legal counsel representing a party of standing.
That shows pretty clearly that McNeff was full of shit when he said he’d be happy to email Schneider a copy of the inventory. And, sure, you can say that between Schneider visiting them and the time this email was sent they decided that they didn’t like how they were going to be portrayed, but there’s a pattern here. In the video Schneider releases, he shows McNeff saying “I think we have sent it to Bryan” in reference to the inventory list, and later says that if Schneider and Mansell get on an email thread together he’ll send it to both of them.
They also show McNeff going on TV news interviews claiming that they had told Mansell and Mansell’s lawyer that they were happy to work on going through the inventory list, but that Mansell’s lawyer stopped responding. McNeff said: “we’ve tried to share those with Mr. Mansell in hopes that he can see that we were not attempting — in any shape or form — to withhold anything. Those were then offered to him, and the initial offer was rejected.”
Advertisement
Except that Mansell has the receipts in the form of the email thread between his lawyer and Bricks & Minifigs, which seems to show pretty clearly a very different story. Even as we only see snippets of the emails, it’s hard to square this with what McNeff keeps claiming. The emails show Mansell’s lawyer asking multiple times how to get the money owed or the sets back and finally getting a stiff arm email saying that the two guys who Bricks & Minifigs handed the store to, “Brandon Best and Joshua Johnson, have no legal obligation to return any of the LEGO product.”
And then, even more damning is the closing of the email, saying “We consider this matter closed and will not be returning any LEGO products to you.”
That, uh, does not seem like a company that claims that it has no problem trying to work with Mansell to resolve this issue. Last week we mocked Bricks & Minifigs for having their crisis comms person send us an email about how the company was so eager to help make Mansell whole. That already seemed ridiculous since they’re suing Mansell for $1.3 million claiming RICO. But also, that was before we’d seen this email where the company basically says “shove it.”
Anyway, even as this is just coming from Schneider’s side, it’s hard to see how there’s any additional info that would acceptably square the claims made by McNeff with what’s been presented. There’s now plenty of discussion about how Schneider likely has civil claims he could bring against McNeff. Arguably he could also claim that the police in both American Fork and Provo violated his rights, but that’s likely an extreme longshot (not because the cops are in the right, but because it’s next to impossible to sue the cops for violating your rights).
Either way, we now know that Schneider has legal representation for the civil case, and hopefully that means he can also secure legal representation for the criminal case as well, because that would clearly be helpful. Yes, all of this is tremendous content, but your strategy in court when facing felony charges and your strategy for making viral content can (and should) be somewhat different.
Honestly, given how much attention this has gotten, and the legal help that has started to step up, there’s a decent chance that the criminal cases will go away, but that’s very much not the norm. Planning to go viral is not a strategy any lawyer would recommend for fighting criminal charges.
Advertisement
Anyway, while Schneider’s legal troubles play out, it’s worth remembering that Bricks & Minifigs certainly was not blindsided by Schneider’s Part III. They knew it was coming and that it was blocked by the broader injunction they had obtained in court. They knew that they had negotiated a pared back injunction, which meant Part III would be released soon. They basically had weeks to prepare a PR response to all the damning stuff that video was going to show.
And this is what they came up with.
The company released yet another tone deaf blog post on Friday, which talks about all the “changes” they’re making to respond to some of the criticism they’re getting. Half of them basically read as admissions of how badly run the company is. They admit that they’re going to work more closely with franchises (apparently they’ve recently jacked up franchise fees) and have put in place a “standardized inventory and trade system” effectively admitting that they had nothing before.
There are also some comments on the lawsuit that look written by the world’s worst crisis comms team. I mean, this is embarrassing:
Advertisement
Some have asked why Bricks & Minifigs hasn’t simply dropped the pending litigation connected to this matter. The answer is that accountability and integrity must run both ways. We remain open to a mediated, amicable resolution, and we don’t view litigation as the preferred path. We’re also not willing to submit to manipulation, threats and unsupported accusations.
That… doesn’t answer the question. And sure, fine, accountability and integrity should run both ways, but you’re the one out there claiming that you’re trying to make Mansell whole… while telling him you won’t give him any of his stuff back and then suing him for $1.3 million.
The blog post also suggests they have to keep the lawsuit going because Schneider’s conduct “has crossed the line from fair criticism into harassment, misrepresentation, and targeted harm.” But that’s Schneider, not Mansell. It’s also laughable given the footage that’s been shown so far.
And of course they try to avoid the fact that all the presented evidence makes them look terrible with this favorite line:
We will not try this matter on social media, and we will not use this statement to relitigate every disputed detail. Those issues belong in mediation and, if necessary, the legal process.
Again, that makes sense in certain contexts, but here where you’ve been running your mouth off constantly on TV show after TV show with claims that directly contradict what corporate actions and emails have said, it does the opposite of building credibility.
Advertisement
At basically every turn where Bricks & Minifigs could have made the situation better, they’ve dug in and made it worse. It seems like a bad strategy. So bad it’s even worse than going to court and trying to defend yourself from criminal charges without a lawyer.
Recently, politicians in the UK pushed forward with plans to eviscerate privacy and free speech on the internet by announcing a ban on social media for users under 16 that is set to take effect in Spring 2027.
The UK government continues to falsely characterize this policy as a necessary response to growing concerns about online harms for young people. In reality, much like the Online Safety Act, it will cause more harm than it will prevent.
Users of all ages are burdened with proving their age before accessing content, with social media platforms such as Snapchat, TikTok, YouTube, Instagram, Facebook, and X included in the ban. There remains no reliable, privacy-preserving method of verifying the age of every internet user and methods vary from one platform to the next.
Young people will not simply be protected from being contacted by adults or endlessly scrolling—they’ll also lose access to educational videos on YouTube, local events on Facebook, and potentially cut off from distant friends and family.
Advertisement
Public policy must be effective, proportionate and respectful of fundamental rights. Young people deserve better than a policy built on panic, and all internet users deserve a safe and free internet. A social media ban generates headlines, but it will not solve the problem.
A Brief History of Age-Gating in the UK
Age restriction proposals in the UK date back to a decade ago, when the proposed Digital Economy Bill was put forth to (among other things) restrict young people from accessing pornographic websites. While the Digital Economy Act of 2017 passed without age-based restrictions, it laid the groundwork for later age verification measures.
Over the next few years, age checks for porn websites were announced then delayed several times. But it wasn’t until a consultation under the 2016-2019 May government and the 2020 publication of the Online Harms Whitepaper that age verification became a broader idea.
In 2023, the UK passed the controversial Online Safety Act, establishing powers that could weaken privacy protections and freedom of expression for internet users worldwide. In July 2025, the government implemented age assurance measures on sites hosting “harmful” content.
Advertisement
And despite politicians affirming repeatedly that the Online Safety Act would solve all of the problems with online safety, this year they decided it in fact did not go far enough. American social psychologist and The Anxious Generation author Jonathan Haidt—who has called for age-related social media bans around the world, despite significantscientific doubt about his research—met with the UK Health Secretary in February to push for the ban.
In March, politicians introduced plans for a social media ban into the Children’s Wellbeing and Schools Bill to “prevent children under the age of 16 from becoming or being users” of “all regulated user-to-user services,” to be implemented by “highly-effective age assurance measures”—effectively banning under-16s from social media.
When this proposal came before the House of Commons, MPs defeated and proposed their own amendment: enabling the Secretary of State to introduce provisions “requiring providers of specified internet services” to prevent access by children, under age 18 rather than 16, to specified internet services or to specified features; and to restrict access by children to specified internet services which ministers provide.
But the social media ban does not stop there. The provision also requires internet service providers to limit the time kids spend online, and has rules about who can contact them online. These extreme rules will take decisions about using technology away from families and put them in the hands of government regulators.
Advertisement
The history of this proposal shows that the UK government has repeatedly returned to the same flawed idea: restricting access to online services by requiring age checks for everyone. But the fundamental problems have not changed. There is still no widely available way to verify age online without compromising privacy—but even if there were, broad restrictions on social media will inevitably limit access to lawful speech, and valuable online communities, and arts and culture.
Romain Dumas guided Ford’s Super Mustang Mach-E up the Goodwood hill in 41.98 seconds during Sunday’s Timed Shoot-Out. That mark beat the next quickest entry, a new Gen4 Formula E car driven by Daniel Ticktum, by 0.48 seconds. It also left the rest of a strong field more than four seconds behind.
Ford had previously won the top spot with the SuperVan 4.2 in 2024 and the F 150 Lightning SuperTruck in 2025, making this their third consecutive win. So this came as no surprise, but it was still cause for celebration for Dumas, who won his fifth Shoot-Out overall and third in a row. This time it was with the electric Super Mustang Mach-E, a beast of a car designed from the ground up to be a real electric hillclimb monster, rather than a production car with an electric motor slapped in. These three UHP 6 phase motors provide 1600 horsepower, but they are distributed to all four wheels, which helps keep it on track. The power comes from a 50 kWh battery pack, and regenerative braking can reach 710 kW, which should help slow it down on the tiny course.
BUILD A RACING LEGEND – Relive motorsport history with the LEGO Technic 1966 Ford GT40 MKII Race Car model kit for adults ages 18 years old and up
REALISTIC FEATURES & FUNCTIONS – Steer using the knob on top, open the doors to explore the interior, lift the engine cover to reveal the V8 engine…
AUTHENTIC 1966 DESIGN – This vintage race car model features iconic black and silver design inspired by the real Ford GT40 MKII champion car
They’d made a few changes, including a large rear wing, lowering the ride height, upgrading the brakes, and adjusting the suspension. All to go through the brief yet demanding course as quickly as possible. That new aero kit generates a remarkable 6900 pounds of downforce at 150 mph, which you can guarantee helps when you’re on a narrow strip of tarmac with walls and hay bales surrounding you. And you know Dumas is fairly good at managing tight courses. In fact, just three weeks before, he won the Pikes Peak International Hill Climb in the identical car in 8 minutes, 18 seconds. He had come from a 12-mile mountain route and was still able to maintain a good speed on the 1.16-mile English hill.
Advertisement
Qualifying demonstrated that the car was pretty quick, but Sunday appeared to be a challenge, with the heat and dust making grip difficult for many of the drivers. Dumas got out to a shaky start, but eventually gained momentum and carried it all the way to the finish. It ended up being the top two electric cars for the first time in the event’s history, and to make matters even better for Ford, all combustion vehicles were well behind.
It’s noteworthy to state that the time difference between first and second is less than half a second, but the time difference between second and third is more than four seconds. When competing against great drivers and automobiles, that kind of margin is significant. The top ten results were rather unambiguous, with a 1974 Shadow DN4 finishing third at 46 points 31 seconds and a VW Polo Rallycross coming in fourth at 46 points 32 seconds.
Ford collaborated with the STARD team to develop build this monster. They had also collaborated with them on the previous two winning electric vehicles. Each time, they refine what works and what doesn’t, and this knowledge is taken forward into larger racing efforts and future road car development. So, even though this was a unique hillclimb car, it remains relevant. Ford even stated that this 41.98-second performance was faster than their own computer simulations predicted the car could do on this track, indicating that there is still more work to be done.
Microsoft announced that a bunch of new adjustments are coming to the Windows Search Box in Windows 11. Each individual item is a minor improvement, but hopefully in aggregate, the changes will add up to a better experience for search. Members of the Windows Insider program may start seeing the changes beginning today.
The whole user experience for the Windows Search Box will be streamlined. The home screen has been pared back for less visual clutter, which should make it easier to access recent searches easily. The results display also looks cleaner, with larger spacing creating room to show useful metadata for hits. Users can now toggle whether they want to see hits from the web and the Microsoft Store beside local results. Web searches will no longer show sponsored content such as products and promotions at the top of the results. The improved search should also do a better job of finding both files and apps.
After a long, not terribly successful push to try and make Copilot happen, Microsoft has been shifting focus back toward making quality of life improvements to Windows 11. There have been incremental updates, like allowing users to adjust the size of the Start menu, alongside more meaningful changes such as a system for rolling back faulty drivers.
Summer is firmly here and the temperatures are feeling borderline apocalyptic in much of the northern hemisphere. Why not avoid the angry sun and stay inside where it’s (hopefully) cooler and distract yourself with some of the best movies on streaming right now?
Your choices are notably rich too. The spring hit sci-fi movie Project Hail Mary, about the global freeze threatening Earth as a result of the sun mysteriously going out, is now on Prime Video, after winning theater audiences over with the help of an adorable pile of pebbles. If, however, you want to embrace the flames, you’ll find some like minds in Avatar: Fire and Ash on Disney+, where a violent new tribe of Na’vi just want to see the world (well, a semi-sentient living moon) burn.
If you instead find the heat hellish, then a double bill of Satanic panic might be more fitting. Both Ready or Not 2, also on Disney+, and They Will Kill You on Hulu tap into a previously unexplored yet surprisingly rich subgenre of “estranged sisters with melee weaponry killing murderous cultists”—insert the “weird it happened twice” meme here, but just go with it. Or if you prefer not to switch your brain entirely off for entertainment, there’s also the far more cerebral Archive or the dark dystopia of The Long Walk to take your mind off the unbearable heat.
Here are WIRED’s picks of the best movies to watch right now.
Advertisement
Project Hail Mary
Waking up aboard a spaceship to find himself the only crew member still alive, amnesiac middle school science teacher Ryland Grace (Ryan Gosling) makes for an unlikely astronaut. Even worse, he’s Earth’s last hope for survival, sent out into space in search of a way to stop a strange phenomenon devouring the sun itself—and almost every other star in the sky. It’d be an impossible task solo, but luckily Ryland has back-up in the form of Rocky (James Ortiz), the first alien humanity has ever met, a five-legged stone creature who communicates in song.
Adapted from the book of the same name by Andy Weir (author of The Martian), Project Hail Mary is a fantastic slice of survival drama and hard science fiction, but the real heart of the movie is Ryland’s and Rocky’s growing friendship. Prepare to fall in love with an excitable rock spider-thing—fist my bump, friends.
Avatar: Fire and Ash
Picking up from 2022’s The Way of Water, human-soldier-in-a-Na’vi-body Jake Sully (Sam Worthington) and his family are in mourning following the death of their eldest son Neteyam, leading wife Neytiri (Zoe Saldaña) down a dark path. As the family struggles to stay together, the colonialist human forces led by Miles Quaritch (Stephen Lang) forge a deadly alliance with a warmongering tribe of fire-worshipping Na’vi ruled by the nihilistic Varang (Oona Chaplin)—who aims for destruction to spite the Na’vi’s god, Eywa. James Cameron’s almost inconceivably ambitious saga returns with a visually spectacular outing taking viewers through striking new regions of the lush jungle moon Pandora. Fire and Ash is no jumping on point, but thankfully you can binge the entire trilogy (for now; Avatar 4 and 5 are planned) on Disney+.
Ready or Not 2: Here I Come
The first Ready or Not from 2019 was something of a sleeper hit. A gory slasher with a sense of humor, it played with the fears and uncertainties of marriage and joining a new family, with bride-to-be Grace (Samara Weaving) caught in the murderous traditions of her fiance’s clan. This sequel, helmed by returning codirectors Matt Bettinelli-Olpin and Tyler Gillett, picks up right after that first film’s credit roll, leading to Grace’s reunion with her estranged sister Faith (Kathryn Newton)—just in time to be swept into another murder game against a cabal of billionaires and aristocrats looking to fill a power vacuum left by Grace’s almost-inlaws. Schlocky, campy comedy horror, elevated by the presence of Sarah Michelle Gellar in an almost anti-Buffy role, Ready or Not 2 isn’t high art but it’s a hell of a lot of fun.
Advertisement
They Will Kill You
If Ready or Not 2 is schlock, then They Will Kill You is a step up the ladder—an almost exploitation-level hack-’em-up that takes liberal inspiration from Sam Raimi’s original Evil Dead trilogy and smashes it unapologetically together with Gareth Evans’ one-man-against-a-tower-block action epic The Raid.
QinetiQ testing of SuperDielectrics’ water-based zinc cells showed up to 13x longer high-power cycle life, 100C discharge in 36 seconds, and zero thermal runaway
The company is pitching its solution to AI datacenters as a ‘shock absorber’ that can deal with power requirement spikes safely and reliably
SuperDielectrics’ Faraday 3’s first commercial deployment is slated for early 2027 as it goes up against existing Lithium-ion battery-based energy storage as an alternative that can be deployed inside the data center
Cambridge-based advanced battery technology company SuperDielectrics recently published independent test results for its upcoming water-based Zinc battery, which could help cement its de facto presence in most projects that leverage renewable energy, whose output is often inconsistent.
The next-generation battery offers up to 13 times longer life cycle under high-power cycling, zero thermal runway, and charging and discharging gains that eclipse those of Lithium-ion-based batteries.
This makes it a great add-on for critical infrastructure, as well as for a new, fast-growing sector that is extremely power-intensive with huge power spikes in tow: AI data centers.
Latest Videos From
A solution that caters specifically to the AI power problem?
SuperDielectrics is painting its battery technology as the holy grail for AI data center problems, and with good reason: it is where all infrastructure spending will be concentrated over the next decade, and the firm decidedly wants a piece.
Advertisement
SuperDielectrics’ core innovation is a unique, patented polymer that enables it to deliver results that dwarf those of similarly configured single-layer lithium-ion cells. With the battery leveraging Zinc in addition to the proprietary polymer, the abundantly available metal could mean that batteries would be cheaper, immune to geopolitical and supply chain vulnerabilities, and easier to scale.
Room temperature testing of the battery showed impressive results when compared to lithium-ion-based alternatives, with SuperDielectrics claiming:
– Up to 13x longer cycle life under high-power cycling (10 mins charge and discharge, 100% depth of discharge);
Advertisement
Sign up to the TechRadar Pro newsletter to get all the top news, opinion, features and guidance your business needs to succeed!
“These results provide independent benchmarking of the technology at the heart of our batteries: a proprietary polymer separator that combines rapid ion transport with the safety advantages of an aqueous electrolyte system,” noted Shelley Brown, CTO of SuperDielectrics.
Advertisement
“The outcome is an energy storage solution purpose-built for high-power, fast-cycling applications, offering an alternative to lithium-ion systems that typically rely on extensive oversizing and additional safety infrastructure to manage demanding power profiles.”
There is more to the story that makes the solution ideal: Unlike lithium-ion-based solutions, the battery is safe to deploy in datacenters, whereas off-site deployments are currently required for lithium-ion-based solutions due to their potential as a fire hazard.
AI datacenters are known to be particularly power-intensive and often require significantly higher peak power when performing certain computing tasks. Lithium-ion batteries are not ideal for this because not only do frequent charging and discharging degrade them fairly quickly, but they also do not charge or discharge as fast as the Zinc-based offering from SuperDielectrics.
Advertisement
As a result, as noted by the CTO of SuperDielectrics, data centers need to overcompensate for this limitation by buying more capacity than needed to allow smooth operations without pushing existing lithium-ion-based infrastructure too hard.
There is a trade-off, however: Zinc batteries generally sacrifice energy density to offer advantages over lithium, and SuperDielectrics’ silence on capacity does not work in its favor here.
Despite this, thanks to AI compute requirements’ near-violent power swings requiring a moderator, SuperDielectrics seems to have a winner on its hands, at least on paper, but it might have its limits for datacenters that require longer backup times. The question that comes to mind is whether a smoothing layer can grow into genuine storage, especially for rack-scale product deployment.
On the flip side of the equation, SuperDielectrics is not the only one toying with a ‘safe’ battery solution; Chinese researchers are concentrating on a similar approach even as the automobile industry is already using sodium for EVs, which is already racking up wins in extreme low-temperature conditions.
Along with iOS 27’s public beta, Apple has also released macOS 27 Golden Gate’s public beta build, so that early adopters can get their hands on the new features, including Siri AI, and provide timely feedback to help ensure a stable iOS launch in September.
If you’re sold on all the new features but don’t want to put your faithful MacBook through developer beta duty, a public beta offers a much more refined experience. To install macOS 27’s public beta, follow the steps given below.
Shikhar Mehrotra / Digital Trends
So how do you actually install it?
Head to beta.apple.com and enroll your Mac in the free public beta program; no developer account needed.
Once you’re signed up, head to System Settings > General > Software Update.
Next to Beta Updates, click the small “i” button.
A dropdown will appear in the top-right corner, and from there you select macOS 27 Golden Gate Public Beta.
Hit Done, and your Mac will start pulling down the update.
You should know that developer betas have been fairly solid so far, but there have been some Safari memory hiccups and occasional reliability issues with beta builds in general. Back up your Mac first, and think twice about installing it on your primary machine.
Apple
What’s actually new in Golden Gate?
Like iOS 27, Siri AI is the headline update here as well. It indexes your Messages, Mail, and other content so it can actually answer questions and take action instead of fumbling through web searches.
Spotlight search, which got noticeably flaky on macOS Tahoe, feels far more dependable in this build. Apple also tweaked the Liquid Glass look and unified window corner radii so things stop looking inconsistent across apps.
Writing Tools and Visual Intelligence both got smarter, and Safari now has an extension builder that works off plain-English prompts instead of code. Shortcuts got the same treatment. Expect a handful more betas before the final Golden Gate build ships alongside iOS 27 and the iPhone 18 Pro this September.
Security cameras frequently promise peace of mind yet deliver grainy clips, nonstop false alerts, or hidden fees that add up fast. The Tapo C530WS from TP-Link, priced at $55.99 (was $70), takes a simpler route and focuses on the basics done right. A 5-megapixel sensor records in 3K resolution. Details hold up well when you zoom during playback, whether checking a face at the front gate or reading a plate on a vehicle that pulled into the driveway. Daytime color stays natural and edges remain defined across the frame.
Night Vision uses a Starlight sensor, which picks up any available light when collecting color footage rather than immediately converting to black and white. The camera is capable of reaching relevant distances outside without shining a large spotlight that would alert anyone in the area. This strategy ensures that the scene remains recognized even in deeper darkness. This model covers a lot of ground because of the built-in mobility, which allows you to spin the view almost 360 degrees left and right and tilt it up and down quite a little. In the Tapo app, you may simply drag the view to a new location or establish a few fixed spots for easy jumps later. When motion is detected, the camera will smoothly follow it across the screen without pausing in mid-sentence.
𝟑𝐊 𝟓𝐌𝐏 𝐂𝐥𝐚𝐫𝐢𝐭𝐲 & 𝐙𝐨𝐨𝐦 – Experience incredibly detailed resolution with 3K 5MP live view for stunning…
𝐂𝐨𝐦𝐩𝐥𝐞𝐭𝐞 𝐀𝐫𝐞𝐚 𝐂𝐨𝐯𝐞𝐫𝐚𝐠𝐞 – Enjoy 360º horizontal and 135º vertical views with pan/tilt…
𝐒𝐭𝐚𝐫𝐥𝐢𝐠𝐡𝐭 𝐂𝐨𝐥𝐨𝐫 𝐍𝐢𝐠𝐡𝐭 𝐕𝐢𝐬𝐢𝐨𝐧 – Activate Full-Color Mode to see more in…
The motion detection component is operates entirely on the camera and identifies people, pets, as well as autos, but only sends notifications for specific occurrences. Unlike more simple motion sensors, which will fire off at the slightest movement, such as a leaf blowing in the wind or a shadow shifting, there is no additional cost to gain the whole set of capabilities.
Advertisement
Video is saved directly to a microSD card (up to 512GB) in the camera, allowing you to record for weeks (or more) at once, depending on how you set up the camera. If you only need to preserve specific clips of footage, the free Tapo app allows you to go back and watch them or simply watch what’s going on live on your phone. There is an optional cloud plan available if you want additional backup, but it is not required to get the camera running properly.
For most users, setting up the device is simple: scan the app code, connect to your 2.4GHz Wi-Fi network, and attach the unit using the included accessories. It’ll function nicely on a wall or ceiling and has an IP66 classification, which means it can survive some dust and water ingress. A conventional adapter provides power, so make sure there is an outlet nearby or use a protected extension lead.
When it comes to installing it properly, the first thing to search for is a strong Wi-Fi connection. Some people use a simple extender / booster to solve the problem if their router is too far away from where they want the camera to be. Once configured, the app responds quickly to pan and tilt commands, and you can also link it to your Alexa or Google Assistant, allowing you to talk to it if desired.
We are expecting to hear news about the new generation of Google’s Pixel smartphone lineup when the company hosts its next showcase event in August. But in the meantime, a possible leak has gotten us colorfully-inclined buyers pretty excited.
9to5Google, by way of sister site 9to5Toys, found three listings on Amazon that might show some new looks coming to the Pixel 11. These potential placeholders depict one smartphone in a bold magenta and another in a rosy peach hue. The publication noted that there are some convincing details in the listings’ specs. The colors have one set of names in the titles and a different set in the description, and the second trio aligns with a previous leak suggesting a fuchsia model was on the way. At the time of publishing, none of the Amazon listings in 9to5Google‘s article are live.
It’s entirely possible that these are not from official Google sources. But I would really like it if they turn out to be real. Paying for our gadgets is going to be a grim and painfully expensive experience, can’t we at least have the actual hardware we’re splurging on be vibrant and joyful?
Enterprise infrastructure teams have spent the better part of a decade pushing workloads into Kubernetes. Applications, APIs, batch jobs, data pipelines — if it runs in a container, it belongs in the cluster. The operational benefits are well-established: declarative configuration, horizontal scaling, self-healing, native integration with CI/CD pipelines and observability tooling. Kubernetes has become the default operating model for production workloads.
Except for desktops.
Secure desktop and application delivery — the kind that enterprises depend on for remote work, privileged access, and regulated-industry workflows — has remained stubbornly outside the Kubernetes model. Legacy virtual desktop infrastructure was built in a different era, for a different set of assumptions: pre-allocated VM pools, bespoke management planes, proprietary appliances, and operational tooling that has nothing to do with how modern platform teams work. The result is a split infrastructure reality: a modern, cloud-native application layer on one side, and a manually managed, operationally isolated desktop layer on the other.
Advertisement
That split is expensive. It means different tooling, different scaling behaviors, different observability approaches, and different operational runbooks. Platform engineers who are proficient in Kubernetes still have to context-switch into an entirely different mental model the moment a desktop infrastructure problem arises.
The more fundamental issue is that this split is unnecessary. Secure, containerized workspace delivery is a workload that Kubernetes is architecturally well-suited to run. Sessions are containers. Scaling is demand-driven. Configuration should be declarative. The only thing missing was a platform built to take advantage of that alignment.
Why the timing is right
The appetite for Kubernetes-native workspace delivery has grown significantly as organizations mature their container platform investments. Platform teams that have spent years standardizing on Helm, GitOps workflows, and Kubernetes-native observability are increasingly unwilling to make an exception for desktop infrastructure. The question has shifted from “can we run this on Kubernetes?” to “why isn’t this running on Kubernetes already?”
At the same time, the security case for containerized workspace delivery has become more urgent. Browser-delivered, containerized workspaces provide session isolation that VM-based desktops cannot match — each session is ephemeral, isolated at the container boundary, and terminates cleanly without persistent state. For organizations managing sensitive data, insider risk, or third-party access scenarios, this isolation model is a meaningful security control, not just a deployment convenience.
Advertisement
The convergence of these two trends — Kubernetes-native infrastructure expectations and containerized session security — creates a clear opportunity for platforms that can address both simultaneously.
What Kubernetes-native deployment looks like
A Kubernetes-native deployment uses Kubernetes as the control plane for workspace infrastructure — handling orchestration, scaling, and lifecycle management through the same declarative model used across the rest of the platform. Instead of relying on dedicated management appliances or pre-provisioned desktop pools, infrastructure is managed through the same CI/CD, GitOps, observability, and security workflows the platform team already operates. This gives platform teams a consistent operational model rather than maintaining a separate toolset for desktop infrastructure.
Kasm Workspaces, the browser-delivered workspace platform, is purpose-built to use Kubernetes as the control plane for workspace orchestration and delivery. Its deployment model is designed for real enterprise environments — not simplified demos — with production-grade Helm charts that follow Kubernetes conventions, tested upgrade paths between versions, and a standardized backend architecture validated across production deployments. An RDP Gateway component purpose-built for the Kubernetes topology enables Windows and Linux virtual machine access through the same platform.
Key capabilities include:
Advertisement
Horizontal session scaling driven by actual demand, orchestrated by Kubernetes — no pre-warmed VM pools required.
Declarative configuration through Helm values, enabling GitOps and CI/CD integration for workspace infrastructure.
Namespace-level isolation and compatibility with existing RBAC policies, ingress controllers, and secrets management integrations.
Metrics export for integration with Prometheus and existing observability stacks.
Rolling builds by default, reducing maintenance windows and enabling more predictable version management.
Real-world applications
Regulated-industry remote access. A financial services organization running a Kubernetes-based application platform can deploy Kasm into the same cluster, using the same operational tooling, to deliver isolated browser and application sessions to analysts and advisors. Sessions are ephemeral, network egress is controlled, and the entire deployment is managed through the same GitOps pipeline as their application workloads.
Contractor and third-party access. Organizations that regularly onboard contractors or external vendors — with the associated privileged access risk — can provision Kasm sessions on Kubernetes that scale up during engagement periods and scale back during low-demand windows. No persistent access. No VPN extension to external parties. Containerized isolation at every session boundary.
AI/ML development environments. Teams building and running AI models need GPU-enabled development environments with security controls that general-purpose cloud desktops rarely provide. Deploying Kasm on Kubernetes with NVIDIA MiG Multi-Instance GPU support lets platform teams deliver fractional GPU resources into isolated workspace sessions — giving data scientists the compute they need without shared-infrastructure security exposure.
The operational shift
The practical implication of a Kubernetes-native workspace platform is that platform teams can stop treating workspace infrastructure as a special case. The same engineers who deploy applications can deploy the workspace platform. The same pipelines that manage application configuration can manage workspace configuration. The same dashboards that monitor application health can monitor workspace health.
Advertisement
That operational consolidation reduces overhead, improves consistency, and eliminates the context-switching cost that has made desktop infrastructure a persistent pain point for cloud-native organizations.
For organizations still running legacy VDI alongside modern cloud infrastructure, the question is no longer whether a Kubernetes-native alternative exists. It does. The question is when to make the transition.
Organizations interested in evaluating Kubernetes-native workspace delivery can explore the platform at kasm.com and try out community edition for yourself.
Daniel Ben-Chitrit is the Chief Product Officer at Kasm Technologies.
Advertisement
Sponsored articles are content produced by a company that is either paying for the post or has a business relationship with VentureBeat, and they’re always clearly marked. For more information, contact sales@venturebeat.com.
Facepalm: Popular collaboration platform Zimbra was recently updated to patch a potentially dangerous vulnerability in its Classic Web Client component. In theory, malicious actors could abuse the flaw to run script-based malware directly on users’ machines. Needless to say, customers are advised to install the update as soon as possible.
Zimbra owner Synacor has released a new version of its collaboration software, and users should install the update as soon as they can. Zimbra “Daffodil” 10.1.19 includes a fix for a stored cross-site scripting (XSS) vulnerability that could be exploited to compromise customers’ machines through Zimbra’s Classic Web Client.
Cybercriminals could abuse the flaw by sending specially malformed email messages, Zimbra said. A vulnerable client would run the malicious code the moment the message is opened. While the company rates the deployment risk as “low,” the flaw could still prove dangerous for users’ session data, mailbox information, or account settings.
Cross-site scripting vulnerabilities are a common class of security issue routinely abused by resourceful attackers. An XSS flaw lets attackers inject client-side, malicious scripts into web pages viewed by other users. A “stored” XSS bug like Zimbra’s is an especially dangerous variant, since the malicious script is permanently saved on the server rather than triggered on the fly.
Advertisement
Zimbra’s security guidance states that all customers using the Classic Web Client should update the component to the latest available version. Additional advice is given for those using custom SNMP mitigations. So far, the XSS flaw has not been assigned a CVE identifier.
At any rate, malicious actors have been trying to target Zimbra with XSS vulnerabilities for almost five years now.
In October 2025, yet another persistent XSS bug in the Classic Web Client (CVE-2025-27915) was allegedly exploited in zero-day attacks targeting Brazilian military personnel. Other XSS-based attacks targeted Zimbra’s platform in May 2025 and 2023.
Though it has existed in various forms for more than two decades, Zimbra has changed hands several times over the years. The company was purchased by Yahoo! in 2007, sold to VMware three years later, and finally acquired by Buffalo-based service company Synacor in 2015. Zimbra provides collaboration tools, email servers, and web clients in both open source and commercially supported editions. However, the latest open source versions of Zimbra products no longer include official, free binary builds.
You must be logged in to post a comment Login