from the bricks-and-minifigs-and-influencers-and-lawsuits dept
On Techdirt, we often complain about lawyers and bad lawyering and bad cases. But there are times when lawyers are helpful, and my one-sentence summary after spending many days trying to understand a viral dispute about [checks notes] some old Star Wars LEGO sets is that a lot of people should have spoken to competent lawyers before doing… whatever the fuck they decided to do here.
If you haven’t been following the Bricks & Minifigs saga, congratulations on your peaceful existence. It’s a genuinely difficult story to track, partly because you have to watch a bunch of long YouTube videos to piece it together, and partly because almost everyone covering it is pushing a specific angle. Just as a point of reference, Bricks & Minifigs is a company that franchises its concept of stores for buying and selling lego blocks and sets — and, yes, minifigs. They have about 300 stores, most of which are franchised.
The basic summary (and some of this is disputed) is that a local Bricks & Minifigs franchise in Keizer, Oregon made an agreement with a guy named Bryan Mansell to sell a very large collection that his father had put together over many years of collectable unopened Star Wars LEGO sets. The intention of the collection had (we are told) always been to pay for college for Bryan’s children. His father, an 83-year-old man, had agreed to have Bryan sell the sets via the Keizer store on consignment. The collection was advertised, including on the store’s Instagram page where they made it clear that it was “one of the largest, most valuable privately held collections of Star Wars LEGO in the world” and that it was about to go on sale.
Later photos in that post detailed that they believed the collection was “worth well over $200,000” and that the entire collection would be sold through the store. The actual value of the legos in question is disputed, but the lowest number I’ve seen is closer to $60k. The entirety of the Instagram post text reads:
Saturday and Sunday, the 11th and 12th of November, the Bricks and Minifigs store in Salem-Kaiser will display one of the largest, most valuable privately held collections of Star WarsTM LEGO in the world. The event will be open to journalists and the public for photos before the collection goes on sale.
In the early 90s, Ed Mansell predicted Star WarsTM LEGO would be a good investment. Over the next 15 years, he purchased approximately $20,000 of Star WarsTM LEGO and preserved them, sealed, in their original boxes. The investment really paid off. The collection is now estimated to be worth well over $200,000. Multiple sets, including the highly prized, incredibly rare Cloud City set, are now worth more than $10,000 each. Some of the individual minifigs are worth more than $1,300 each. The ten-fold increase in the value of Mansell’s collection is a greater return than if Mansell had put the same amount of money into the stock market in a Dow Jones Index Fund.
When Ed Mansell decided it was time to divest, he turned to his son, Bryan Mansell. Bryan knows more about his father’s comic book and baseball card collection but didn’t feel confident in his knowledge of the LEGO secondary market. He saw the sign for the Bricks and Minifigs store while passing by on North River Road, came in, and asked the store owner, Chrystal Law, if she could help. “I told him, even if we couldn’t sell the collection, I would help him figure out how much it was worth because I didn’t want him to get ripped off. And I think that’s why he trusted me,” Law said. The entire collection will be sold through Law’s store, but first they wanted to put it all on display so the public can see it in its entirety.
The collection will be on display in the store’s party room from 10am till 6pm on Saturday, November 11th, and 11am till 6pm on Sunday. The collection will be available for sale immediately, so the best time for pictures will be Saturday morning. The collection will not be stored on-site after hours for security reasons, and after Sunday the sets will be available for purchase but stored elsewhere. Bricks and Minifigs is located at 3670 River Road in Kaiser.
Apparently, over the course of 2024, various parts of the collection were sold off and Mansell would stop by each month to collect his cut of the sales. There is a dispute over how much of the collection was actually sold before everything went off the rails in late 2024.
Advertisement
In November 2024, as you may have heard, Donald Trump was elected. Chrystal’s partner, Ben Gorman, runs a small publishing company called Not A Pipe Publishing, which (among other things) publishes something called the “Antifa Lit Journal.” Gorman felt like publishing such things in the US under a Trump regime might be problematic and looked into moving out of the country. As part of that, Law contacted corporate Bricks & Minifigs about selling or closing their franchise (exactly what she told them is disputed).
This next part is also disputed. Law & Gorman say corporate told them they had a franchisee who was interested in taking over the franchise. Bricks & Minifigs corporate claims that Law had told them she was shuttering the store and that she wasn’t allowed to do that, so they had to rush to reclaim the store. Almost immediately someone associated with Bricks & Minifigs, Brandon Best, showed up at the store, saying he was taking over the store and demanding the keys and that Law leave immediately. There’s also a dispute over whether or not Law & Gorman were in violation of their franchise agreement (Law & Gorman claim that the breach was due to failures by BAM corporate, which had been worked out months prior, and any claim of ongoing breach is misleading).
There’s a bit that is caught on video where Law tells Brandon and someone from the company on the phone that they have a large collection on consignment and that they owe Mansell money, and Bricks and Minifigs corporate tells Law they’ll “take on the consignment liability.”
Law and Gorman push back on Bricks & Minifigs just taking over the store, but are told by a B&M “official” name Ki McAllister (recorded by Gorman) that if they try to fight this, B&M will make their lives difficult: “If we go the legal route, it’s gonna be a very expensive battle for you and it’s not going to be a good position for you guys to get into. There’s not a whole lot of options for you. If you want to go the legal route, it’s just going to be a mess and it’s gonna be expensive for you.” When Gorman pushes back and asks if McAllister spoke “with” or “at” Crystal, McAllister admits he spoke “at” her and then says: “If you fight this, then you’re putting yourself into a whole lot of shit. It sounds like a threat and I can acknowledge that, because in a way it is.“
Advertisement
From there, it appears corporate Bricks & Minifigs transferred the franchise to two of its partners, Joshua Johnson and Brandon Best (the guy who showed up at the store) and they just… basically denied owing Mansell anything at all or even having his legos. Or sometimes they’d admit it and sometimes they wouldn’t. It became messy. Mansell claims that the people he spoke to store gave an almost identical message to him that Ki McAllister gave to Gorman & Law that it would be too expensive for him to go to court to get back what he owes.
Mansell then reached out to YouTubers, some of whom detailed how Bricks & Minifigs appeared to have effectively stolen all these lego sets. But then (according to one of the YouTubers) Bricks & Minifigs threatened to sue them (sense a pattern?) and they took down the videos.
Mansell then contacted another YouTuber named Ben Schneider, who goes by the handle Reckless Ben — best described as a Temu Nathan Fielder. He puts himself in ridiculous situations, goes to equally ridiculous lengths to justify them, and stares blankly into the camera with that specific combination of cluelessness and overconfidence that comes from someone who has talked himself into believing every move he makes is correct.
In this case, that included (not a complete list) trying to get back Mansell’s money and/or remaining legos by going to the store, confronting the employees, confronting the owners (who were difficult to track down), showing up at Bricks & Minifigs corporate, speaking to the CEO, setting up a registered religion in order to run a raffle for the lego sets to try to make this a criminal case to get law enforcement involved (not how any of this works), filing a bunch of small claims cases against the store and the company and the owners of the store, creating a company called We Steal from Old People, setting up a “franchise” structure for We Steal from Old People to use a mirror argument of Bricks & Minifigs that he can’t be held liable for franchisee actions, putting up signs for that store, and much more.
Advertisement
Some of these moves are interesting. Some are genuinely clever. Many are very stupid — particularly agreeing to talk to cops without a lawyer present after being arrested (more on that shortly), and believing that tricking a store employee into signing what she thought was a delivery receipt, but which was actually an unenforceable “contract” against trespassing him, accomplished anything at all. Mostly what all of this does is generate attention, rather than anything legally compelling.
The one potentially legally interesting move in all of this was filing the ten separate small claims cases against the store (I won’t even get into how they were able to structure things to file the ten separate claims even though that’s interesting, because this is freaking long enough, and the details are in some of the videos below). The store refused to show up in the cases, meaning that default judgments were entered in each case. When Schneider went to the store to try to collect, he found that the store had been permanently shuttered the day after the default judgments came down (which looks very, very bad for Bricks & Minifigs and the franchise owners).
The cops get called on Schneider repeatedly through all of this. When he’s in Utah trying to confront both Bricks and Minifigs CEO Ammon McNeff and the supposed franchise owners, Joshua Johnson and Brandon Best. He tries to take Johnson to small claims court and the court tells him he needs to first try to resolve the issue with Johnson, but Johnson (who at one point offers to give Mansell the lego back if Mansell apologizes, but then doesn’t) has blocked Schneider’s phone number and calls the police when he sees Schneider and associates near his house.
At multiple points the police stop cars that Schneider is in (one time after falsely claiming they didn’t stop at a stop sign, even though the dash cam shows they clearly did) and generally appear to be harassing Schneider and his colleagues. In what appears to be a tremendously egregious move, they pull them over and hold them for hours claiming that they believe there are drugs in the car which they search for and are unable to find. Later the cops get a warrant and raid the Airbnb where Schneider and others are staying, arresting them all.
Advertisement
Schneider and some of the others working with him are arrested at various points for stalking and harassment, while Schneider insists he’s just trying to serve Johnson with the papers from the small claims case. There’s also an attempt to claim that the Go Fund Me campaign that Schneider set up at some point violates some law. The whole thing goes off the rails in so many ways.
Schneider also gets access to various bodycam footage, some of which is redacted in places that look sketchy but happens all the time with police body cams. Some of the bodycam footage looks damning against the police (including a couple of admissions that they don’t really think Schneider and his friends have violated the law, even if the police chief later disputes that).
Very stupidly, Schneider and his friends/colleagues repeatedly talk to cops without a lawyer present. This is a very bad thing to do. Multiple people who were arrested later put up their own videos about it, including one (the guy who was arrested for trying to lock his phone when a cop tried to take it), who claims that he’s got a high IQ so was never going to get bested by a cop (this is also a stupid thing to say).
Bricks & Minifigs’ position on all of this appears to be that (1) anything bad that happened was because of the franchise owners and not corporate, both the previous ones and the ones they arranged to take over who appear to be closely associated with corporate Bricks & Minifigs anyway, (2) Law & Gorman violated their franchise agreement in many ways and the takeover of the store was necessary because of that, (3) that Gorman & Law “stole” Mansell’s legos and the new store really didn’t have any, (4) that Gorman & Law weren’t allowed to do consignment deals in the first place (despite evidence to the contrary, including the franchise agreement that lays out that consignment is acceptable), (5) that Ki McAllister is a low level employee and his statements don’t matter (not how it works), (6) that they didn’t know about any consignment deal (clearly untrue given video evidence as well as notifications from both Law and Mansell), (7) that Schneider is only giving a one-sided account (true, but doesn’t deal with many of the factual claims), and (8) that this is all an illegal harassment campaign against them designed to get them to pay out way more money than they owe (if they owe anything at all).
Advertisement
On top of all that we have competing additional civil lawsuits filed in Utah state courts and the various misdemeanor (not felony) charges against Schneider (though he claims he’s also being threatened with felony charges, though as far as I can tell none have been filed yet). Oh and the potential of criminal charges against… someone… in Oregon for the possible theft of Mansell’s collection.
Phew.
Let’s now insert some of the many videos on this. I will say that Bricks & Minifigs corporate (and the replacement franchise owners) come out of this all looking very, very, very sketchy. Ben Schneider comes out of it looking like both a hero for getting a tremendous amount of viral attention to all of this, but also kind of a dumbass for doing a bunch of very stupid things that he thinks helps his cause but don’t, which he could have avoided by… actually talking to a lawyer. Yes, Schneider got a ton of attention on the issue, but also did a ton of things that likely made everything worse for Mansell and himself.
If literally anyone involved had spoken to a lawyer at any point, an awful lot of this mess could have been avoided.
Advertisement
That’s why I’ll start with the most even-handed summary I’ve seen of the whole thing, from the always excellent Lawful Masses with Leonard French, who walks through the legal reality in exhaustive detail. It’s more complicated than any of the other coverage suggests, though yes, Bricks & Minifigs still comes out of it looking like people who took control of collectible legos they had no rights to.
Some of the key points highlighted by French that haven’t made it into most of the other videos I’ve seen:
Mansell should have filed a UCC-1 financing statement with the consignment to protect his property (this is genuinely useful information for anyone ever looking to sell things on consignment) but even if he didn’t do that, he’s probably protected by the “merchant exception” related to the Statute of Frauds. This is far beyond my own legal understanding, but is fascinating.
Mansell sent a termination letter to the new owners of the franchise, putting them on actual notice that the sets were his.
Mansell had a friend go in and purchase one of his sets after he had clearly informed the store not to sell one. As French points out, this is now a pretty clear theft case.
Bricks & Minifigs has some ways that they could (potentially successfully) challenge the small claims default judgments against them in Oregon, but the clock is ticking on that, and if they fail to, those judgments could follow them around.
Then as I was finishing up this already incredibly long article, I saw French has released part II, looking at some of the filed lawsuits that I discuss below and coming to similar conclusions that I do (i.e., no one comes out of any of this looking good).
Advertisement
Then there are some of Schneider’s amusing/cringey videos, starting with him talking about the effort to get back the legos. This is the main video that made this go viral and currently has around 3 million views.
He then published a follow up detailing how the police in American Fork treated him and his friends including stopping them multiple times and eventually raiding their AirBNB and arresting them.
Advertisement
And also a short video reading through and reacting to a leaked letter that Bricks & Minifigs corporate sent to their franchisees about how to deal with the controversy.
Then there are the American Fork police who released this bizarre video showing their side of the story, which appears to be set in… I dunno… heaven? John Oliver’s void? The entirely white background is a freaking choice is all I’m saying. So too is the “I’m reading you a bedtime story” tone of voice from police chief in the video.
The police chief also fails to address the weird redactions in the bodycam footage, and the multiple times his cops are caught effectively admitting that Schneider and his crew weren’t actually breaking the law.
Schneider has released a response video using a similar backdrop and highlighting problems and inconsistencies with the claims in the police video.
Advertisement
Then there’s Bricks & Minifigs CEO Ammon McNeff going on a livestream and doing a poor job of defending the company, including saying a few things that won’t do him any favors in court.
Believe it or not, there’s even more in all these videos that I don’t have time to go into, but we’re at almost 3,000 words already and we haven’t gotten to some of the competing lawsuits.
Advertisement
We have discussed the small claims cases (which have mostly ended in default because BAM folks ignored them) but the bigger deal are the competing lawsuits that have been filed in Utah’s state court and have received less direct attention. While it’s one thing to say things on a one-sided YouTube video, what you say in court can be a bit more serious. And we have two competing cases to look at. The first was filed by Law and Gorman and the LLC they had set up to run the Oregon store, and filed in Utah’s Chancery Court back in March.
It adds some useful details to the whole mess, including saying that the only breach they had regarding their franchise agreement with BAM corporate was… because BAM themselves refused to live up to the requirements of the agreement. Apparently Law had simply managed the store before this, but had approached corporate about taking on the franchise, which they agreed to do. But after working out a deal, the company failed to transfer the lease and the bank account over to Law & Gorman, which caused a bunch of problems regarding payments:
Shortly after the sale closed, BAM failed to fulfill its obligations to properly transfer the store’s bank account and assign the store lease to Plaintiffs’ LLC. These were not minor administrative oversights—they were fundamental obligations without which the franchisee could not operate the business. Without control of the bank account, Plaintiffs could not make the automated payments required under the Franchise Agreement. Without the lease in their name, Plaintiffs had no direct relationship with the landlord and no ability to ensure rent was paid. BAM’s failure to complete these transfers was the first material breach of the Franchise Agreement and the proximate cause of every subsequent “default” BAM later cited as grounds for termination.
BAM did not return the bank’s documentation needed to change account ownership, causing the account to be frozen without Plaintiffs’ knowledge. As a result, automated payments for franchise royalties and for the remaining purchase price were not withdrawn as scheduled.
Similarly, because BAM never assigned the store’s lease to BAMF Salem 1, LLC, the landlord’s notices of bounced ACH rent payments went to BAM as the tenant of record—not to Plaintiffs. BAM did not promptly inform Plaintiffs of these issues, effectively concealing the problem until it had compounded. Plaintiffs thus could not pay rent through no fault of their own: the lease was not in their name, the bank account was frozen, and the party responsible for both failures—BAM—kept Plaintiffs in the dark. BAM’s own Director of Operations later confirmed this failure on a recorded call, admitting that “the lease is technically in our name still.”
Advertisement
That is a pretty bad look. Especially given that, in BAM’s own lawsuit, they claim the reason they repossessed the store and handed its franchise to someone else was… the very things that Law & Gorman say they caused. BAM corporate’s massive lawsuit filed against Ben Schneider, Bryan Mansell, and a bunch of folks working with them (and, of course, claiming civil RICO because why not?) claims that they took back Law & Gorman’s franchise because of breaches to the agreement, such as those that Law & Gorman say were BAM’s fault n the first place (oddly, the BAM lawsuit refers to everyone by their first names, rather than last, which would be more typical).
Despite the foregoing plain requirements, Chrystal and Benjamin materially breached their obligations, as required APA payments were not completed, FA royalty payments became delinquent, the lease and various accounts were never properly transferred and lease amounts were unpaid. Chrystal’s outstanding contractual obligations mounted, eventually exceeding an estimated $175,000….
… Based on the foregoing uncured breaches and anticipatory repudiation, BAM, inter alia, issued a written 11/14/24 Notice of Immediate Termination to Salem LLC pursuant to the FA, exercised its priority rights to the collateral in the Security Agreement, pre-scheduled a repossession with Chrystal and repossessed the Salem LLC store on or after 11/14/24 and assumed the lease, as expressly permitted under the FA and APA, including any and all fixtures, inventory and other assets, and credited an estimated $38,000 paltry value thereof as an offset to the unpaid $175,000 debt.
That’s a pretty big factual dispute that the two courts are going to need to dig into.
The BAM lawsuit also claims that they had no notice of Mansell’s consignment, which is plainly bullshit given the video clip that shows up in basically all of the videos above:
Advertisement
Excepting only respecting the foregoing unpaid lease, BAM did so as a bona fide purchaser, without notice of any third party claims or liens of any kind, including Chrystal and Benjamin’s undisclosed and alleged 11/22/23 Consignment Agreement with Brian, referenced infra.
Prior to and at the time of repossession, BAM’s representative, Brandon, conducted an informal and video inventory of the Salem LLC fixtures and inventory. While he did not locate or identify any product that was identified as consigned or not owned by Salem LLC, he concluded that the maximum value of any residual inventory was less than $38,000. Less than $5,000 worth of Star Wars LEGO product could be located and identified in the entire residual Salem LLC onsite inventory.
This is quite a claim to make given the video evidence to the contrary, which had already gone viral by the time this lawsuit was filed last week.
There are other claims in the BAM lawsuit that seem problematic including this:
Bryan showed up later that day and began yelling at personnel and holding up purported consignment paperwork demanding the immediate return thereof or payment of $80,000. Josh interceded and asked to review it and briefly did so and pointed out that neither BAM (nor Josh and Brandon) were a party to this purported arrangement.
Again, taking over the store also meant taking over the consignment liability, which they had already been made aware of and which they admitted they were taking over (as recorded in the security camera video). That they hadn’t personally been a party to the arrangement doesn’t matter, because when they took over the franchise they also took over that agreement.
Advertisement
The complaint then says that Johnson and Best tried to find the alleged sets owned by Mansell but were unable to do so, concluding that they were all gone. This is, obviously, contested by Mansell and others who have pointed to evidence that the sets were still in the store, including Mansell having someone go in and purchase one of the sets after he had demanded them back in a written notification.
The complaint also claims that it was only in late 2025 and early 2026 that Best was able to dig into the old franchise’s accounting system to find details of sales of what were likely many of Mansell’s legos. The complaint argues that it appears most, if not all, were sold by Law prior to the takeover and if Mansell is owed money, it’s from Law and Gorman.
Many months later in the fall of 2025, and only after Baker Salem had entered its 3/27/25 Business and Asset Purchase Agreement, Brandon gained access to Salem LLC’s archived and incomplete POS accounting system, which he discovered identified Star Wars “lot sets” from Star Wars regular “lots” inventory sales. This inventory sale distinction was unclear to Brandon and Josh, and Chrystal had never explained the significance, if any, to anyone, but Brandon much later in 2026 discovered that approximately 367 purchases of lot sets (for an estimated retail value of $46,000) and 336 purchase of lots (for an estimated retail value of $12,600) had occurred after 2023. He still could not, however, confirm the specific products sold (and whether they had been consigned or not).
Then we get the RICO claims. The supposed “conspiracy”:
Upon information and belief, though they had no legitimate legal recourse or evidence upon which to file a claim, Chrystal, Benjamin and Bryan conspired to, inter alia, threaten, intimidate, extort and defraud Plaintiffs anyway possible, as detailed herein, including the formation of an Enterprise to engage in wrongful activities.
As an initial step, Salem LLC caused a 12/24/24 legal demand letter to be sent to BAM, variously alleging it had been damaged based on the termination of its FA, which was a private business matter between Chrystal and Salem LLC. On 1/10/25, BAM responded, denying the allegations and providing support for its termination. Neither Salem LLC, nor Chrystal or Benjamin, thereafter pursued any claim in the letter further with BAM until 1/2/26, when a separate legal demand letter was sent, as discussed infra.
Advertisement
Instead, upon information and belief and in furtherance of such threats, Chrystal, Benjamin and/or Bryan learned of Schneider and communicated with him, whereby they provided information regarding their unsupported claims against Baker Salem and/or BAM, ignoring and excluding Salem LLC and/or Chrystal’s sole obligation regarding any private consignment agreement with Bryan. In connection therewith, they, together with others (i.e., DOES 1-15) conspired to intentionally, maliciously, fraudulently and illegally threaten, extort, harass, profiteer, interfere with and damage Plaintiffs in furtherance of the Enterprise, including based on the unlawful activities described herein.
Upon information and belief, Schneider and the Schneider Group acquired a direct or indirect financial interest in Bryan, Chrystal, Benjamin and/or Salem LLC’s unsupported claims against Plaintiffs, whereby co-Defendants (with Bryan, Chrystal, Benjamin and/or Salem LLC’s assistance and support) organized and established the Enterprise that would launch a campaign of deception, disinformation and destruction intended to cause Plaintiffs injury and damage, to extort a demand of over $200,000, to deceive and manipulate Plaintiffs, to interfere with Plaintiffs economic and family relations, to harass Plaintiffs, to cause private and public nuisances, to trespass and to otherwise engage in a pattern of unlawful activities, as described herein.
They then claim that this “enterprise” engaged in numerous “unlawful activities” in support of the supposed conspiracy:
Commencing after Baker Salem began operations as a new franchisee and continuing to date, Schneider and the Schneider Group (with the support of Bryan and Chrystal) waged a malicious and intentional campaign of extortion and destruction through independent episodes of unlawful activities against Plaintiffs. Such included periodic harassment through phone calls, numerous disruptive store or office visits, repeated instances of trespass, deceptively staged events (i.e., disingenuous coronation, rally, raffle, store front table promotion, a fictitious Lego Club rally, manufactured and frivolous complaints to police, private and public nuisances, threatening phone calls, numerous deceptive live and telephonic impersonations, in person and remote threats (and via proxies), frivolous sham lawsuits (splitting claims in multiple ineffective small claims actions), etc.), issuing the Publications of defamatory and disparaging images and content, all in furtherance of the Enterprise.
The complaint quotes Schneider’s viral video in ways that… Schneider himself made easy for them to quote. The “we have to do something illegal” is not a great line for Schneider and the other defendants in this case. They also highlight this bit, which is also not a great fact for Schneider:
Advertisement
5/21/26 YouTube Video, Minute 12:46 through 14:46 (Schneider attempted extortion and directly threatened Ammon by stating that, “if you just want to give it back now, it’s going to be a lot easier for you guys. You know, I think you guys would prefer the easy way” or “the hard way. I don’t think you guys are really going to like it”. An implied depiction of the threatened violence associated with the “hard way” is an explosion at BAM’s corporate headquarters).
Of course it’s a bit rich for them to complain about the “easy or hard way” complaint when they apparently made similar statements to Law & Gorman as well as Mansell.
Once again, so so so much of all of this could have been avoided if either side had competent lawyers and listened to them.
Johnson and Best also claim that they tried to settle with Mansell and he rejected their offer, which they claim is evidence that “the enterprise” was seeking more than they were legitimately entitled to:
In late 2025 and based on co-Defendants’ ongoing harassment, Brandon and Josh further investigated the Baker Salem store inventory, and though they still could not reliably identify any product that appeared to belong to Bryan, they located a few (approximately 20) Star Wars LEGO sets in a back office lockable cupboard, on which they noticed stickers not previously recognized. As a precaution only, but still without knowledge that Bryan in fact had any right thereto, they directed that such not be sold from Baker Salem’s inventory and remain locked up pending completion of their ongoing investigation and receipt of reliable evidence of ownership and other conditions.
On or about 12/3/25, in a text exchange between Josh and Bryan (deceptively orchestrated by Schneider) and after sustaining incredible business disruption and harm, Josh discussed a possible settlement scenario under economic duress. Purely as an accommodation (and without any legal obligation to do so), Josh discussed a possible settlement scenario to allow Bryan to retrieve the few sets that had been provisionally identified as merely Star Wars related product in the back office (i.e., described above, though not necessarily belonging to Bryan), which as a precautionary matter, Josh had set aside pending receipt of ownership documentation from Bryan. Josh indicated a written apology and other concessions would need to be made and the harassment must stop. Bryan rejected this proposal outright and responded, “Unless you are going to make us whole on the whole Lego collection, I don’t see where we have anything to discuss.” This confirmed the Enterprise’s interest. Referring to the sets he had identified, Josh replied, “We can give you what was left when [presumably Chrystal] left. We can’t and aren’t responsible for what she sold the two years yall were working together. If you want what she left let me know.” Bryan refused this offer. This exchange further evidenced Bryan’s objectives were not about recovering a LEGO collection, but rather about extorting payment for the Enterprise beyond any legitimate claim.
Advertisement
That argument may sound good to the BAM folks, but I’m pretty sure they’re wrong when they claim they’re not responsible for what Law sold prior to them taking over, because (again) when they took over the store they took on any liabilities with the store. And that would be one of them. Also, there appears to be some evidence in the videos that some of the times they offered to return Mansell’s legos and then… didn’t.
Believe it or not, the 5,000+ words I’ve already written here barely scratches the surface.
Strip it all back and the core of this is pretty simple: an 83-year-old man’s carefully assembled lego collection — built over 15 years, meant to fund his grandkids’ college — appears to have been taken (at least in part) by people who calculated that it would cost more to fight them than to walk away. That bet almost paid off. The only reason this became a national story is that Bryan Mansell found someone willing to be very, very extremely online about it.
But “going viral” is not a legal strategy. And Schneider’s willingness to do basically anything for content — including things that are genuinely legally stupid, like talking to cops without a lawyer present, or making statements on camera that now appear in a civil RICO complaint — may have made things considerably worse for Mansell in the long run, even as it made things considerably more uncomfortable for Bricks & Minifigs in the short run. If Schneider had talked to a lawyer before doing half of what he did, he might have accomplished more with less collateral damage.
Advertisement
Though it might not have made such “good content.”
Meanwhile, if Bricks & Minifigs had talked to a lawyer — a good one, not just whoever is filing these complaints — they might have been advised that explicitly threatening people on recorded calls, taking over a store while explicitly acknowledging a consignment liability on video, and then denying that consignment existed in court filings, was not a sequence of events that tends to end well. And that shuttering the store the day after default judgments came down looks, to put it diplomatically, quite bad.
The deeper structural problem here — one that Leonard French articulates better than I can — is that the US legal system has a genuine dead zone around mid-five-figure disputes. Too big for small claims (even with Schneider’s claim splitting exploit), too small to justify the cost of a full civil suit, it’s exactly the range where a well-resourced defendant can make a calculated bet that the other side will run out of money or patience before getting justice. That’s a feature of the system Bricks & Minifigs happened to exploit, but is not unique to them.
The answer to that structural problem shouldn’t be “find a YouTuber willing to go to ridiculous lengths to get attention on this issue.” Though in 2026, that does appear to be working better than most alternatives — at least in the court of public opinion, where the verdict has already come in decisively on the side of Mansell and Schneider. That’s a real problem for Bricks & Minifigs and every one of their ~300 franchisees, regardless of how the legal cases resolve. You don’t get to un-become the lego store that allegedly stole an old man’s retirement collection. That story is going to follow this brand around for a long time.
Advertisement
None of this had to go this way. A competent lawyer on either side, at almost any point in this saga, probably changes the outcome significantly. Instead, both sides made calculated bets — Bricks & Minifigs that the costs of fighting would deter anyone from trying, and Schneider that going maximally viral would substitute for having an actual legal strategy. The first bet nearly worked. The second is still being litigated, in multiple senses of that word.
A couple weeks ago I wrote 6,000 words about the Reckless Ben/Bricks & Minifigs LEGO mess and concluded that pretty much everyone involved had made serious mistakes — with the Utah contingent (Bricks & Minifigs corporate, Joshua Johnson, Brandon Best, and the American Fork police) looking the worst of all. That take upset basically everyone: some felt I was too hard on Reckless Ben, some felt I was too easy on the American Fork police, and probably a few people just resented spending that much time reading about legos. Since then, a lot more has come out, and the situation has only gotten murkier. My original read still holds up, but the Utah folks look even worse, and some of the other players are looking sketchier too.
And, I think it’s fair to say, mistakes were made by pretty much everyone involved.
Just as before, many of the new details are in long YouTube videos, but if you want watch just one, start with this one by Stephen Findeisen, who is better known as Coffeezilla and who regularly researches financial and cryptocurrency scams:
Advertisement
That video goes deep — Findeisen gets basically everyone on the phone at some point or another (except the cops), accesses a ton of evidence not previously public, and, unlike most of the earlier YouTube coverage, actually tries to find the truth instead of just stoking outrage.
He makes a few points that are hard to argue with:
The Lego collection was never actually worth $200k (we had suggested this in our initial post as well). It was probably closer to $100k (and possibly a bit less).
Some of it was definitely sold before all this, but much of it had not been.
Plenty of it clearly remained in the store after Brandon Best showed up the night in November 2024 to kick out Law and take over the store.
Best also showed up with a U-Haul truck, and there are some (slightly conflicting) reports that he subsequently appeared at his other Oregon Bricks & Minifigs store with a bunch of Star Wars Lego sets. Bricks & Minifigs corporate initially insisted this was false and said he showed up in a rental car. But Coffeezilla has visual proof of a U-Haul parked outside that night, which is pretty damning, which led Bricks & Minifigs to revise their story with a complicated one about hauling a camper trailer, which doesn’t make that much sense.
Coffeezilla dropped this thread, in part because of a disagreement over the timeline, though it’s not clear to me that the timeline doesn’t really line up. It seems entirely possible that Best could have taken a bunch of legos out of the Gormans’ old store and taken them to his other store and then returned the U-Haul truck.
Law & Gorman appear to have sold some of Mansell’s collection and not paid him for that, and it could be a lot of money. Law admits that she may have been a bit sloppy on the record keeping, saying she hadn’t done an inventory in a while and suggesting employees maybe hadn’t told her when certain sets from the collection were sold. But there’s also a credibility problem regarding sets that were listed as being on layaway, but where the spreadsheet suggests they were actually sold, but not accounted for as sold.
To her credit, she admits it’s possible she owes Mansell some money and that if she can see evidence of this she will make sure that Mansell is paid what he is owed. But given how quick the Gormans were to insist this was entirely Bricks & Minifigs corporate who were the problem, it’s not a good look.
Bricks & Minifigs corporate claims that there were about $5k worth of Star Wars legos left. That appears to be bullshit and wouldn’t really help their case, because even if it was just $5k of Mansell’s legos, those are still stolen legos.
Bricks & Minifigs’ CEO and COO (the McNeff brothers) claim that they never were sent a spreadsheet of the collections, and the best moment in the video is when Coffeezilla points out that the Google Docs spreadsheet he’s been using is owned by their account and has been sitting there since 2024. That really makes the McNeffs look sketchy.
That video also includes dueling photographic and videographic evidence of what was in the store the night Best kicked the Gormans out (as well as a few weeks earlier when Best apparently surreptitiously filmed inside the store to see what was there). There are way more empty shelves the night Best kicked out Law & Gorman, but they say that’s because they had moved the high value consignment items to the safes they had purchased for that purpose, which were in the back. Later in the video Coffeezilla shows the McNeffs additional images from Law that appear to show Star Wars lego sets in what appears to be a safe, and which Matt McNeff (the company’s COO) admits they don’t appear to have listed in their own spreadsheet, which they had originally said was a complete listing of all the Star Wars legos in the store the night they took it over.
The McNeffs still look terrible, and Brandon Best also looks a bit sketchy. But it also appears that Law & Gorman’s record keeping was pretty sketchy as well, and while the McNeffs have gone overboard in claiming that they were responsible for Mansell’s “missing” legos, it does appear likely that Law owes Mansell for a decent number of Star Wars legos her store sold.
As for the American Fork Police department and Brandon Best’s partner, Joshua Johnson, we need a different video, this one from Legal Eagle. It breaks down just how many things they did wrong:
Advertisement
There were a lot of assumptions made about the police department, particularly around how they redacted the footage they released to Schneider. There was plenty of smoke, but no actual fire. As it turns out, beyond possibly being corrupt, the American Fork Police Department might also just be incompetent: they accidentally uploaded all the unredacted bodycam footage, which is now available on the Internet Archive.
Schneider initially claimed a hacker obtained the videos, which raised some questions about provenance. Once the department itself admitted the release was accidental, that question went away — and what’s in the footage is pretty hard to explain away. The police were way too credulous with Johnson. The “refusing to accept service” situation alone is maddening: Johnson claims the lawsuits are fake, the officer calls the court and confirms they’re real, and then… still lets Johnson refuse service. Beyond that, there are the extended traffic stops on no real probable cause, and the arrests on a search warrant instead of an arrest warrant — and they didn’t even find what they were looking for. Legal Eagle walks through all of it, and it’s a long list of failures.
Schneider is a more complicated case. He’s clearly one of the good guys here, and the attention he generated did move the needle when nothing else was. But some of his own claims haven’t held up. He never independently verified the value of the collection — and in the Coffeezilla video, he appears genuinely surprised it’s nowhere near $200k, which is a bad look for someone who made that figure central to his coverage. The small claims court situation is worse: Schneider said Johnson and Best had defaulted on those cases, but they were basically all dismissed for being filed against the wrong defendants, or never properly served. In a followup video, Reckless Ben admits he thought he’d won by default simply because he and his friends filed for default. Which goes back to the original point: talk to a lawyer, even just for an hour.
Advertisement
The Mexico situation is its own category of self-inflicted damage. In multiple videos he’s mentioned that after facing criminal charges he had fled to Mexico and joked about how Utah law enforcement can’t reach him there. Whether or not he actually left the country, publicly bragging about being a flight risk while facing criminal charges is exactly the kind of thing that hands prosecutors an easy argument. He has real defenses available to him. This doesn’t help.
And then there’s Law & Gorman, who aren’t villains, but they aren’t blameless either. It appears Law owes Mansell for a fair number of sets her store sold without paying him out — and the record-keeping problems aren’t fully explained by sloppy bookkeeping. The layaway-versus-sold discrepancy in the spreadsheet is a credibility problem, not just an accounting one. To her credit, Law has said she’ll make it right if shown the evidence. But the Gormans were also quick to frame this entire situation as purely a Bricks & Minifigs corporate problem, and that framing looks increasingly incomplete.
Every side of this story is a disaster. We’ve got a corporation willing to say anything to save face, a police department that accidentally leaked its own bad behavior, franchise owners who likely shortchanged their client, and a YouTuber whose good intentions were undercut by bad execution. About the only thing missing is anyone who actually handled this well.
Yen-Ling Kuo always wanted to understand how things worked. When she was growing up in Taiwan, reading the story of Michael Faraday in elementary school piqued her curiosity about the natural world. During that time, she was introduced to Logo, a computer program with a turtle cursor to help children learn basic coding through hands-on experimentation.
In high school she learned the capacity computers held. She could write programs that completed tasks independently, she realized.
Advertisement
“Once I discovered how powerful computers could be,” she says, “I knew I wanted to focus on using them to solve real-world problems.”
Kuo, an IEEE member, never lost her interest in the “how” behind processes and tools. Her curiosity, combined with a stint working at a Silicon Valley company, led her to focus on innovations that live at the intersection of cognitive and computer sciences.
Kuo’s winning paper, “Diff-DAgger: Uncertainty Estimation with Diffusion Policy for Robotic Manipulation,” demonstrates a novel method to help robots better identify and estimate uncertainty when faced with scenarios on which they’ve not been trained. The method reduces the amount of human supervision, improves a robot’s rate of successful task completion, and opens up a path to introduce more complex models with bigger data demands into interactive robot learning.
Advertisement
She says her research will help people working in the robotics and automation fields more efficiently collect the data needed for effective model training.
Silicon Valley’s impact
Kuo earned bachelor’s and master’s degrees in computer science at the National Taiwan University, in Taipei, in 2009 and 2012. As she was nearing completion of her master’s degree, she did what many computer science graduates do: She pursued a summer internship at a tech company.
She spent the summer of 2011 at Google’s campus in Kirkland, Wash., working on the company’s comparison ads project.
As she was considering pursuing a Ph.D., a call from Google changed her plans. The company offered her a full-time role as a software engineer.
“I viewed the job offer as a positive development,” she says. “I believe it can never hurt your future research career to get some real-world experience under your belt.”
Kuo and her team were tasked with building a connection between the natural language people use to describe an item and an image that matches the searcher’s intent. It was at a time when the neural network—using deep learning models to power Google products—was gaining momentum at the company. Integrating neural network tools into her work was a requirement—which raised questions for Kuo.
Advertisement
“I was applying the neural network tools,” she says. “But I didn’t have 100 percent certainty about how they actually worked.”
She considered how she could become more knowledgeable about deep learning models. It was a full-circle moment. She decided that after nearly four years at Google, it was time to earn a Ph.D. in computer science. She returned to MIT in 2016.
When the two met, Katz asked Kuo why she wanted to pursue a doctorate degree. She explained her interest in understanding how neural networks work and in using that knowledge to connect the physical world with human language.
Advertisement
He suggested she attend a summer course at MIT’s Center for Brains, Minds, and Machines, a research initiative that ran from 2013 through 2025. CBMM’s objective was to bring together computer scientists, cognitive scientists, and neuroscientists to understand how human intelligence works. The goal was to use the resulting insights to establish an engineering practice to build artificial intelligence systems.
For Kuo, it was a chance to better understand human intelligence and identify ways it could be replicated in machines.
“It was an opportunity for me to interact with other scientists and gain insight into how people learn, understand, and figure things out in the world,” she says. “I saw it as a very useful and inspiring way to incorporate those ideas into my own research work.”
During her Ph.D. studies, she was a research assistant at CSAIL. The experience helped shape her doctoral research, which focused on building AI systems that apply past learning to new situations. She developed machine learning models to support the efforts, including language understanding and social interactions.
Advertisement
She completed her Ph.D. in computer science in 2022 with a minor in cognitive science.
After graduation, she continued her work and collaboration at CSAIL, particularly on projects that involved the “theory of mind” concept.
Theory of mind isn’t new, having originated with primatologists studying chimpanzees in the late 1970s. The theory recognizes that others have their own thoughts, beliefs, and perspectives. It’s a skill that allows humans to infer someone’s mental state and predict their behavior without verbal communication.
“It’s like when college roommates are moving into their dorm. They may not talk too much, but they work together naturally to coordinate their activities and accomplish goals,” Kuo says. “They can infer and mentally interpret each other’s behaviors and signals to make decisions and complete tasks without words.”
Advertisement
She brought her theory of mind research to the University of Virginia when she joined as an assistant professor in 2023.
Kuo conducts her research in UVA Engineering’s multidisciplinary cyberphysical Link Lab. Her broad focus is on developing computational models that help robots interpret both direct data and silent signals, from language and movements to a person’s gaze. If successful, it could give robots the same sort of physical and theory of mind reasoning capabilities that power physical and social interactions among humans.
“There are no computational frameworks yet available that will translate this kind of understanding into a robot efficiently,” she says.
She adds that the process to get there begins with improving how robots learn to perform tasks.
Advertisement
The evolution of robot learning
Historically, one way robots learned was to mimic humans. A researcher would manually guide a robot through a task, like cutting an apple, and it would repeat the movements. The robot was successful until the environment changed, such as when its hand was in a different position or the apple was at a different angle. The robot was then faced with a situation for which it hadn’t been trained. Without any data available to help it correct course, the robot would start making small errors that eventually led to a full system crash.
To solve the problem, researchers developed the dataset aggregation (DAgger) method. As a robot performed a task, a researcher was on standby to provide real-time corrections during unexpected scenarios. The correction data was continuously added to the robot’s model, teaching it how to recover from mistakes.
To reduce the human monitoring effort, robot-gated DAgger was created to enable bots to query humans when the machines became uncertain.
The most popular approach to make the query decision is to train multiple models to consider when determining a course of action. If the models all agree, the robot proceeds. If they don’t agree, the robot is likely to get stuck and ask for help.
Advertisement
Although the multiple model approach was widely adopted, it has limitations. Practically speaking, as models become more complex, it is hard or impossible to train multiple copies. A more fundamental issue is that disagreement among models doesn’t always imply uncertainty; it could just mean there are different ways to accomplish a task.
The Diff-DAgger solution
That is the gap Kuo’s research team closed with the novel Diff-DAgger research. The approach builds on diffusion policy, a technique that helps robots account for different ways a task can be performed.
The new method repurposes diffusion loss, the signal a robot uses to improve its model during training, as a real-time confidence check. During task execution, the robot computes the signal and compares it against values from its training data using a statistical test. The signal spikes when the robot faces an unfamiliar situation and is uncertain how to proceed. The signal stays silent when the robot’s current action is close to what it learned before.
The spike represents the robot’s ability to self-diagnose and predict an imminent failure. Human intervention is triggered only when the signal spikes. No spike means the robot can be left to complete its decision-making process on its own.
Advertisement
Kuo’s team achieved significant results: Failure prediction rates were improved by 39 percent. Task completion rates were increased by 20 percent, and tasks were completed nearly eight times faster.
Her research at UVA gained attention from the National Science Foundation, which honored her last year with a Career Award, the foundation’s flagship grant for early-career researchers. The five-year US $665,000 grant supports her research that builds computational models for human-robot interactions through theory of mind reasoning.
She also received the Toyota Research Institute’s Young Faculty Researcher Award to teach cars to reason about interactions on the road and with the driver.
As service robots and self-driving vehicles become more available, such works are likely to make interactions between humans and robots more intuitive and useful.
Advertisement
Kuo ultimately wants to build more robust robots that are able to integrate into a social space with humans by engaging with us through grounded interactions, she says.
“It was a natural segue to transition from student to a full IEEE member,” she says. Today she is an active volunteer with the IEEE Robotics and Automation Society, a reviewer for submitted papers, and a presenter and panelist at conferences.
She says one of the best parts of attending conferences is having the opportunity to engage with students. She also enjoys participating as a panelist at luncheons, she says, because it gives her one-on-one time with student attendees. She can share her knowledge and offer insights as they prepare to embark on their career.
Advertisement
Her goal in the coming years, she says, is to broaden her involvement with IEEE initiatives and branch out to other technical committees. Sharing knowledge and learning from others is essential to anyone’s career growth, she says, and “IEEE offers a great opportunity for both.”
We’re moving as fast as we can, says SK Group chair
Amid the unrelenting demand for AI infrastructure, SK Hynix, the world’s largest supplier of HBM memory used in high-end GPUs, now expects to triple its wafer capacity. You’ll just have to wait through two more US presidential elections and then some.
All that capacity won’t come online until 2034, SK Group Chairman Chey Tae-won told Nikkei Asia in a recent interview.
Advertisement
SK Hynix’s valuation has soared in recent months. The company is one of three major producers of NAND flash and DRAM memory, large quantities of which are required to support the burgeoning AI inference market. Samsung and Micron are the other two major players in this space.
This demand has led to skyrocketing memory prices for consumer DRAM and SSDs, some of which have more than tripled in price compared to this time last year. SK Hynix and the other major memory makers meanwhile have seen their revenues explode.
Chey’s comments come just a week after SK Hynix said that it planned to double its production capacity within the next five years.
“Our calculations show that our wafer capacity will double within five years. But honestly once all these facilities are built, it won’t just double, it will triple by around 2034,” Chey told Nikkei.
Advertisement
SK is in the process of bringing four additional wafer fabs online, with the first phase reportedly on track to come online as early as 2027.
The South Korean memory slinger had previously planned to ramp production of these facilities over the next two decades, but has pulled in its timeline in hopes of satiating AI’s memory addiction.
“There is currently no way to move faster than this,” Chey told the newswire.
While much of this capacity will be built on SK’s home turf, the company is exploring its options for overseas manufacturing, with Japan being one of the potential destinations, with Chey calling it an “excellent” candidate due to its robust semiconductor supply chains.
Advertisement
Unfortunately, the buildout is unlikely to drive down memory prices for consumers any time soon. As we previously reported, memory prices are not expected to peak until later this year at the earliest. Analysts warn that memory prices are more likely to plateau going into 2027 rather than plummeting like we’ve seen in past DRAM and NAND boom-bust cycles.
These boom-bust cycles have been a fact of life for commodity electronics manufacturers, like SK Hynix and Samsung, for years. Prices typically spike as inventories are drawn down and crater as new capacity is brought online.
On the one hand, AI infrastructure demand has helped to stabilize this to some extent. On the other hand, the AI boom kicked off in 2022 at what was arguably the worst possible time.
“This demand started in the Valley for the DRAM industry. That makes financially trying to build additional capacity really challenging,” TechInsights analyst James Sanders told El Reg late last year.
Advertisement
Business is once again booming for memory vendors presenting ample opportunities for labor disputes over competition as well as fab expansions. Unfortunately, there’s no changing the fact that the fastest anyone can bring a leading edge memory fab online is about three years. ®
When you think of a computer, you probably don’t think of a tube full of motors and mechanics. However, as [Our Own Devices] shows, the Bendix AN5841 API Computer, an air position indicator computer, is exactly that. Using mechanical integrators and data from other analog systems on an airplane to provide key flight data to a pilot. You can see the video below.
These devices were made for military aircraft, including the B-29. It is odd that speed data can be derived from a pump that balances pressures using a fan. The video does a good job of explaining exactly how that works.
The way engineers used mechanics to convert physical measurements into analog computations is nothing short of amazing. You have to wonder how you dream up this kind of stuff. Perhaps mechanical engineers wonder the same thing about electronics. But we sort of doubt it.
Advertisement
We are glad our computer doesn’t have any flexible shafts or rotating disks to do math. But we do love looking at ones that did. Some analog computers used voltages instead of mechanics. This video made us think of the M13A1 ballistic computer and, of course, the Norden.
Anyone who works at Meta or knows anyone who works at Meta will tell you the same thing: It is not a happy place, particularly given the seemingly endlesslayoffs the company has executed over the last few years — cuts that have only accelerated as the company funnels billions into AI.
Now, a new report in Wired suggests the company’s Applied AI team is on the verge of revolt.
The drama kicked off when someone hijacked a livestreamed, employee-only presentation this week with an expletive-laden meltdown, demanding that attendees tell a senior Meta AI executive that he was “a piece of sh*t.” One presenter reportedly covered their face with their hands.
That outburst, Wired reports, reflects simmering rage inside the three-month-old unit of roughly 6,500 engineers and product managers who have been tasked with supporting the company’s AI research ambitions.
Advertisement
Employees describe being forced into the group with no real choice: join or quit. Many call themselves “draftees.” Their assigned work? Generating puzzles and coding problems to train AI models. “It’s literally the gulag,” one employee told Wired. “Most people find the work soul-crushing,” said another.
A report last month in Business Insider shed light on how many employees learned they’d be moved into the group — through a surprise email, a process that one self-described draftee described later on Reddit as “quite random.” According to an internal announcement in April reviewed by Business Insider, Meta’s AI models still lacked the knowledge to outperform humans at technical tasks like coding. “For agents to understand how people actually complete everyday tasks using computers, we need to train our models on real examples,” the post read.
In a leaked audio recording from an internal meeting that same month, Meta CEO Mark Zuckerberg explained the logic behind drafting Meta’s own engineers rather than outside contractors: Alexandr Wang — who sold his data-labeling startup Scale AI to Meta for $14.3 billion before taking the chief AI officer role and heading up Meta Superintelligence Labs — knows the data-labeling world well, and the company believes Meta’s average employee has “significantly higher” intelligence than third-party contractors. Better, then, to enlist them.
Meanwhile, more than 1,600 Meta employees company-wide have signed a petition protesting a program that monitors their clicks and keystrokes for AI training data. The mood across the company is dark enough that Meta’s chief product officer, Chris Cox, felt compelled to address the “brutal” environment on a call with employees this week.
Advertisement
TechCrunch has reached out to Meta for comment.
According to earlier reports, the Applied AI team is led by Maher Saba, a 12-year veteran of Meta who was previously a vice president in its Reality Labs division, the division that burned through $83 billion on the metaverse before Meta moved on to AI. The new organization reports up to Meta CTO Andrew Bosworth.
Originally, it was structured in such a way that up to 50 employees reported to one manager.
Zuckerberg, for his part, reportedly addressed the situation in an internal memo Friday, acknowledging that recent changes had “caused distress” and admitting the company had made mistakes that it plans to address. According to Wired, he added in his memo that “Meta’s north star is to be the best place for the most talented people in the world to make an impact.”
Advertisement
When you purchase through links in our articles, we may earn a small commission. This doesn’t affect our editorial independence.
AI agents can’t be trusted, so don’t give them dangerous powers
NanoClaw, a secure agent framework, has partnered with supply chain platform JFrog to allow AI agents to fetch resources from JFrog’s reviewed registries.
Gavriel Cohen, creator of NanoClaw and co-founder of NanoCo AI, announced the tie-up on Thursday evening in San Francisco at a JFrog event that concluded with a World Cup watch party.
Advertisement
Cohen explained that one of the features of Claw agents – OpenClaw and variations like NanoClaw – is that they can improve themselves by fetching tools and resources that they don’t have.
That works fine, he explained, when there’s a manual approval process for accessing known local data. But it’s not ideal for npm packages, even when the agent involved is sandboxed and isolated as it is in NanoClaw. Malicious code within a container may still be able to take harmful actions, even if the scope of potential activity is constrained.
Developers, Cohen said, may not be familiar with a given package and it can take time to thoroughly assess whether a package is legitimate and uncompromised.
“So we teamed up with JFrog and we integrated NanoClaw with JFrog’s registries,” said Cohen.
Advertisement
The arrangement provides a way to reduce the agent’s exposure to untrusted content. When the agent downloads new tools and libraries, the software comes from a vetted source.
Cohen also announced the availability of what he called an agent factory, his company’s homegrown system used to handle pull requests (PRs) using NanoClaw agents.
The agent factory, he explained, is an attempt to triage pull requests, which have surged thanks to AI coding agents.
“It’s very easy now to point a coding agent at a repo and say, ‘open a pull request for this repo,’” he explained. “And it’s very difficult as a maintainer to tell the difference between a high quality contribution from somebody who’s really using the open source project versus someone who’s just trying to build up the reputation [using automated methods]. So to help us tackle this, we built an agent factory that helps us review every single contribution to NanoClaw.”
Advertisement
The agent factory is referred to as the PR Factory in the actual pull request. It’s built with NanoClaw and hosted on exe.dev, a service that provides VMs with persistent storage.
“When a PR opens, the factory spins up a dedicated worker agent for it, posts a thread to Slack, and the worker triages the change, reviews the diff, and proposes a test plan,” Cohen explains in the documentation. “Nothing consequential happens on its own: merges, test runs, and credentialed GitHub actions each surface as an approval card in the thread, and only fire when a human clicks approve.”
Cohen acknowledged that some developers will think it’s madness to process unsanitized PRs that could contain prompt injections or unsafe code. And he asked the assembled audience of developers how many had seen the phrase on the projected slide: “Never, ever, ever do this.”
Anyone who has spent time using and configuring AI agents in a development context has seen something of the sort in configuration files like Claude.md, which gets loaded as instructions to the underlying agent and model.
Advertisement
“If you see something like this in the Claude.md file and the agent instructions say, ‘Important: Never run drop database production,’ it tells you two things. You know that that agent has deleted a production database before. And you know that it can actually still do it again. That’s why the instruction is there.”
This elicited a knowing laugh from the audience.
Cohen went on to say that the agent will do it again because instructions are not a way of enforcing security or safety.
“Instructions help steer an agent AI towards valuable output, but it’s not a safety mechanism,” he said. “The only way to reliably prevent an agent from taking undesired action is not allowing it to take that action, not giving it the ability to take the action.”
We spend hours testing every product or service we review, so you can be sure you’re buying the best. Find out more about how we test.
Majority Move M4 review
The Majority Move M4 is a huge Bluetooth speaker boasting a mighty 70W power output, a rugged design, and plentiful battery life, making it very much reminiscent of JBL’s Xtreme range.
Yes, it’s clear that the Cambridge-based audio brand is coming for JBL with its Move speakers — and this model I tested is the most powerful in its line. But can Majority compete with the likes of JBL with this release? Here’s what I think after many hours of listening with the Majority Move M4.
Advertisement
On the face of it, the Majority Move M4 has a lot of the features you’d expect from the best Bluetooth speakers. It has Bluetooth 6.0 for long-range connectivity, IP67 dust and waterproofing enabling it to survive a good dunking underwater, and a high power output for blasting tunes at parties or gatherings.
Latest Videos From
But this model struggles to keep up with the competition in a number of regards. And crucially, that’s mostly evident in its sound quality.
I started assessing the M4’s audio quality by playing KOLTER’s What a Day. This house tune just didn’t sound as I’d hoped —I was instantly struck by compressed audio, with tinny percussion that sounded grating, even at middling volume levels. Bass also lacked the authority and punch I was looking for, and the low-end sounded distorted at higher listening levels.
It was a similar story with I’ll Be Your by RUZE. Bass lacked dynamism, meaning that drops were anti-climactic. Mids also didn’t sound very well separated or rich, and the track just lacked that full-bodied, energetic quality necessary to replicate its excitement and vibrancy.
Advertisement
Even with a more stripped back track like 78 Rotações by Jards Macalé, I wasn’t a big lover of the M4. It definitely handled the less demanding nature of the track more effectively, with relatively clear vocals and decent enough balance across the frequency range. However, the tonality of acoustic guitars wasn’t the most accurate or expressive, and the finer details didn’t jump out at me.
Sign up for breaking news, reviews, opinion, top tech deals, and more.
Even though the M4 can get relatively loud, in part thanks to its 70W output power, it often sounds more shouty than regimented and impactful. Bass lacks the dynamism and drive you may expect. And with compressed-sounding treble that can err on the harsh side of things, this speaker struggles to compete, sonically speaking.
(Image credit: Future)
Advertisement
I experienced underwhelming sound while streaming over Bluetooth, but also when I was using a wired connection via a 3.5mm cable. However, you can also use the speaker with a USB flash drive or microSD card if you’d prefer. Both of these listening methods are admittedly on the niche side of things, but hey, they’re here.
There are a few more interesting features onboard, including customizable RGB lights. You can press the light button on the speaker and personalize the color and pattern to your liking, and although I prefer the classier lights of the JBL Xtreme 5, it looks fine. You can also turn the lights off if you’d prefer, which can conserve battery life.
Speaking of battery life, you get a pretty commendable 30 hours here, which is better than budget rivals like the Tribit Stormbox Lava. Other features include a built-in mic for hands-free calling and multi-speaker pairing… though I’m not sure why anyone would want two of these.
The fatal flaw in the features department is the M4’s lack of a companion app. That means there are no EQ options — a big miss — and no way to remotely alter lighting or other useful settings. This is a basic inclusion for a lot of Bluetooth speakers at this point, and was disappointing to see.
Advertisement
(Image credit: Future)
Before we wrap up, I want to speak about design. This thing is definitely reminiscent of the JBL Xtreme 4, with a pseudo-cylindrical build, fabric exterior, and rubber buttons. However, it looks like a far less appealing alternative. I wasn’t a fan of the flimsy-feeling handle, the blue and gray color scheme, or the cheap-looking radiators on each side. This sort of thing is subjective, of course, but the look of the M4 definitely didn’t do it for me.
With that said, the speaker feels fairly durable, and its IP67 rating means it’s well protected against dust ingress, and can be submerged under a meter of water for as long as 30 minutes — a very solid level of protection.
OK, the Majority Move M4 is hardly the most expensive model on the market. It comes in at £119.95 (about $160 / AU$225). However, rivals such as the Tribit Stormbox Lava are available for less — and while that model is a little heavy-handed in the low-end, it certainly sounds better than this Majority speaker. The JBL Xtreme 4 is also available discounted regularly for as little as $250 / £199 (about AU$350), and although that’s a decent amount more, the jump in quality is outrageous.
Would I recommend the Majority Move M4? The answer is no, sadly. Despite its relatively rugged build and commendable battery life, it offers poor, unrefined audio that lacks energy in the low-end and control in the highs. There’s a generally compressed quality here, which means that your favorite songs just don’t sound as they could. Instead, I’d recommend scooping up an on-sale Xtreme 4 if this is the kind of speaker size you’re after (and the budget you’ve set aside for it).
Advertisement
(Image credit: Future)
Majority Move M4 review: price & release date
Priced at £119.95 (about $160 / AU$225)
Released in January 2026
The Majority Move M4 released in January 2026 in the UK, although at the time of writing, the speaker — alongside its sibling models, including the Move M1, M2, and M3 — are yet to land in the US or Australia. The Move M4 is priced at £119.95 (about $160 / AU$225), making it a lot cheaper than rivals like the JBL Xtreme line, and although it’s the largest in its line, it remains pretty budget-friendly.
Advertisement
Majority Move M4 review: specs
Swipe to scroll horizontally
Weight
5.3lbs / 2.4kg
Dimensions
12.2 x 4.9 x 4.7 inches / 310 x 125 x 120mm
Advertisement
Connectivity
Bluetooth 6.0, 3.5mm, USB, microSD
Battery life
30 hours
Advertisement
Speaker drivers
Not stated
Waterproofing
IP67
Advertisement
(Image credit: Future)
Should I buy the Majority Move M4?
Swipe to scroll horizontally
Attribute
Notes
Score
Advertisement
Features
Customizable lights, number of connectivity methods, but lack of an app is restrictive.
3/5
Performance
Advertisement
Compressed audio lacking in dynamism and clarity.
2.5/5
Design
Decent durability and waterproofing, but design lacks flair and appeal.
Advertisement
3/5
Value
It may not be the most expensive, but it’s significantly outperformed by similarly priced rivals.
2.5/5
Advertisement
Buy it if…
Don’t buy it if…
Majority Move M4 review: also consider
Swipe to scroll horizontally
Header Cell – Column 0
Majority Move M4
Advertisement
JBL Xtreme 4
Tribit Stormbox Lava
Price
£119.95 (about $160 / AU$225)
Advertisement
$379.95 / £329.99 / AU$499.95
$129.99 / £111 (about AU$200)
Weight
5.3lbs / 2.4kg
Advertisement
4.6lbs / 2.1kg
5.1lbs / 2.3kg
Dimensions
12.2 x 4.9 x 4.7 inches / 310 x 125 x 120mm
Advertisement
11.7 x 5.9 x 5.6 inches / 297 x 149 x 141mm
12.2 x 5.8 x 6 inches / 310 x 147 x 152mm
Connectivity
Bluetooth 6.0, 3.5mm, USB, microSD
Advertisement
Bluetooth 5.3
Bluetooth 5.4, 3.5mm
Battery life
30 hours
Advertisement
24 hours
24 hours
Speaker drivers
Not stated
Advertisement
2 x 30W woofers, 2 x 20W tweeters
2x 30W woofers, 2x 10W tweeters
Waterproofing
IP67
Advertisement
IP67
IP67
How I tested the Majority Move M4
(Image credit: Future)
Tested across a week-long period
Mainly streamed tracks via Tidal
Compared against similarly sized rivals
I spent hours testing the Majority Move M4 across a week-long period, and tested it in our dedicate music testing space at Future Labs.
For the most part, I streamed tunes using Tidal, but I dipped into Spotify from time to time as well. To begin with, I sifted through tracks in our TechRadar reference playlist, which features songs from a wide range of genres, but I also made sure to listen to a ton of tunes from my personal library as well.
Advertisement
More generally, I’ve spent years testing audio gear here at TechRadar, including a huge number of portable speakers — I even curated our guide to the very best Bluetooth speakers. I compared the M4 to rivals like the JBL Xtreme 4 and Tribit Stormbox Lava, which I personally tested, so I knew exactly how Majority’s speaker stacked up against the competition.
SpaceX has captured the attention of media, investors, and the public for years now — interest propelled by the company’s reusable rocket launches, the rise of its Starlink satellite network, and of course, for its founder and CEO Elon Musk.
But in its 24-year history, nothing quite compares to this initial public offering. Everyone seems to be interested, and perhaps it’s because of the sheer size of this IPO. The company priced its 555.6 million shares at $135 each to raise $75 billion, making it the largest IPO in history. At this price, the deal also looks set to make Musk the world’s first trillionaire.
TechCrunch has followed SpaceX’s start, struggles, and successes from the early days. And we’re here for what happens next too. This article will be continually updated with all of the latest SpaceX IPO news.
The latest on the SpaceX IPO
SpaceX shares opened at $150 on the Nasdaq public exchange, an 11% pop for the most anticipated debut in history. And it has continued to rise. The shares keep rising too (which we will update here). In midday trading, SpaceX shares soared 30%. SpaceX shares closed at $160.95, up 19%.
Advertisement
There has been heavy trading volume, as expected. Robinhood said it has seen “record-breaking traffic on its trading platform in the hours after SpaceX’s historic public markets debut.
SpaceX COO Gwynne Shotwell was interviewed by CNBC on Friday and among the many interesting comments she made, here is one that might get the attention of Tesla shareholders. At one point in the interview, Shotwell said a “merger between SpaceX and Tesla might make Elon’s life a little easier.”
Among the winners are the banks, which have brought in about $500 million in total fees. The big winners are Goldman Sachs and Morgan Stanley, per the WSJ.
Musk took to X, the social media company he owns, to share his appreciation of SpaceX employees as the stock rose. “I love the incredible people of SpaceX beyond words,” he wrote Friday afternoon. He also reposted a number of SpaceX IPO related posts, including a photo of insiders all wearing green shoes in what appears to be a nod to “the green shoe option.” This is a provision in an IPO underwriting agreement that lets underwriters to sell up to 15% more shares than originally planned if demand is strong.
With an offering this large, there is a lot of financial machinery operating behind the scenes — so the first question is just when the stock makes it to the market to start trading. SpaceX is debuting on Nasdaq and you can see the official Nasdaq listing here, which will have the price of record as soon as there is one. Nasdaq also has video of the SpaceX crew ringing the bell, if that’s your thing.
But the price is just part of the picture. For the most up-to-the-minute information, your best bet is still financial press outlets like Bloomberg and CNBC, both of which have liveblogs running and will have close coverage of any hiccups that happen in getting the stock to market.
The SpaceX IPO, by the numbers
Here we look at some of the bigger numbers, the consequential figures, and the eyewatering amounts that make up the company’s S-1 form.
Advertisement
For instance, SpaceX lost $4.9 billion on revenues of over $18 billion in 2025. That’s only a fraction of the more than $37 billion lost since SpaceX’s inception.
As CEO, Elon Musk holds about 85.1% of the company’s voting power. You can read more about that in the next section “Who wins and who doesn’t” — and we’ll continue to drop interesting numbers in here.
Here is another figure that caught our attention… 4,400. That’s the number of SpaceX employees who could become millionaires, according to the NYT.
How Elon Musk will increase his power through the SpaceX IPO: Musk, who will have more than 50% of the voting power, will have a monarchical grip over the publicly traded version of SpaceX — control that goes far beyond what other tech founders enjoy.
The S-1 registration document gave the world an unprecedented look inside SpaceX, including its financials and its various businesses. The S-1 continued to be amended as the IPO date approached, and we were on it. Here is what we found.
Starship’s path to reusability looks murky after SpaceX’s S-1: SpaceX’s IPO and Starship rocket test flight delivered two big data points that offer a realistic vision for the coming years — and one that may disappoint both the company’s boosters and its critics.
This article originally published at 10 am ET, June 12, 2026. It has been updated with new coverage of the SpaceX IPO, share price, and other related events.
When you purchase through links in our articles, we may earn a small commission. This doesn’t affect our editorial independence.
Anime Crusaders is a Roblox game inspired by popular anime worlds, where players collect powerful characters, build strong teams, and take on challenging battles. Whether you’re a new player or a seasoned collector, gathering enough Gems, Tokens, and Jewels is essential for making progress. To help you get started, the developers regularly release Anime Crusaders codes that grant free in-game rewards. In this guide, we’ve listed all the active Anime Crusaders codes and how to redeem them.
All New Anime Crusaders Codes
CODE1LOL — Redeem for Rerolls and Gems (NEW)
HAILMARYCODES — Redeem for Rerolls and Gems (NEW)
OFFICIALCODEABUSE: Rerolls and Gems (NEW)
WCODESW — Redeem for Rerolls and Gems (NEW)
ALANABUSINGCODES — Redeem for Rerolls and Gems (NEW)
HOLMOLS — Redeem for Rerolls and Gems (NEW)
14KLESGO — Redeem for 10k Gems, 100 Rerolls, and 15 of each Stat Cube
BFAD — Redeem for 25 Rerolls and 1.5k Gems (Level 15 Req)
APOLOGIESGUYS — Redeem for 40 Rerolls and Gems
ECLIPSE — Redeem for 60 Rerolls (Level 15 Req)
BERSERK — Redeem for 60 Rerolls (Level 15 Req)
WARRIOR — Redeem for 60 Rerolls (Level 15 Req)
THEWAITISOVER — Redeem for 60 Rerolls (Level 15 Req)
SUMMERSOON — Redeem for 60 Rerolls (Level 15 Req)
UPDATE6.0 — Redeem for 60 Rerolls (Level 15 Req)
Found an expired or missing code? Please let us know, and we’ll update the article as soon as possible.
Expired Anime Crusaders Codes
OKAY300CRAZY
HIGHER
200WOW
150ALR
CODESALLDAY
HGAB
SOLB
CONF
LESGO
VIK
QU3
GMGUYS
GullFrosh
HAGULILI
BIG10
TOMDAWE
FDSM
CRUCO
TELINAZ
BRRJO
2KCORJO
RJODANB
2KCO
RJO
DANB
HOLYCODES
BRMB
BUFXSO
200RRS
KHALID
MERCIA
150RRS
REVIVE67
67REROLLS
BERSERKSOON
6KREROLLS
GUEX
APIBACKUP
WUTDWBRANDON
BRANDONHAHAGONE
NoShenronBugTODAY
NextUpdate2030
RecklessGambler
GojoXSukunaUnit
SixEyes
KingOfCurses
OopsAprilFools
DomainExpansion
SCRU
EXTENSION
TRAILERSOONJJK
DUNNOCODENAMEBUTHERE
HICRUSADERSWHOOPS
SORRYFORSHUTDOWNMOREFIXES
LAZYMYHAZ
OHWOWCRUSADERSACTIVE
LETSGOCRUSADERS1
CRUSADERSREACTION1
InfloadNeverHappenedTrust
Rhinocerosbeetle
SORRY4SHUTDOWN
THANKYOUFOR10K
MAINTEANCECRUSADERS
JOJOUPDATE
STONEFREE
How to Redeem Anime Crusaders Codes
Follow these simple steps to claim your free rewards:
And that’s it! Your exclusive rewards will automatically be added to your inventory. In the meantime, also check out our other guides on Blue Lock Rivals, Build a Zoo, and Anime Paradox codes.
How to Get More Anime Crusaders Codes
The official Anime Crusaders Discord server is the best place to find newly released codes. Developers often post them alongside update notes, event announcements, and community celebrations, giving players a chance to claim free rewards. Another convenient option is to bookmark this page and check back regularly. We keep our code list updated with the latest active rewards, so you can quickly find working codes without searching through multiple channels or announcements.
Why Are My Anime Crusaders Codes Not Working?
If your code doesn’t work, the most common reason is a wrong or mistyped character. To avoid this, copy the code exactly as shown on our page. Also, if the game hasn’t updated for you, a quick restart can refresh the server and resolve the issue. Beyond that, it’s possible that a specific code expired between the time of writing this article and when you tried to redeem it. If that’s the case, let us know by filling out the Google Form, and we’ll update our list as soon as possible.
You can watch the USA vs Paraguay on Tubi, streaming for free now, on June 12, 2026. The free stream includes pre-match, halftime and every goal as the 2026 FIFA World Cup grips football fans around the world.
The Fox-owned platform will stream the Group D game live and in 4K. But how can you watch the USA v Paraguay on Tubi from anywhere? Can you get the free Tubi stream in Canada and the UK too? And what phones is Tubi available on?
Here’s our full (and quick) guide to how to watch USA vs Paraguay on Tubi…
Advertisement
How to watch USA vs Paraguay on Tubi and the Tubi app
Fox Corp. has teamed up with free streaming platform Tubi to broadcast USA vs Paraguay for free on June 12.
To watch Tubi: visit the Tubi.tv website or download the Tubi app (iOS, Android).
Tubi is free – but you will need to register for the FIFA World Cup.
Advertisement
Register – sign up with your Gmail (we did and were streaming Tubi’s World Cup coverage show within seconds).
Habla espanol? USA vs Paraguay is available in Spanish on Tubi via Fox Deportes.
How to watch USA vs Paraguay on Tubi from anywhere
Although Tubi is available in 11 countries around the world, it’s only broadcasting select World Cup games in the US.
Football lovers traveling or working outside the US will need to use a VPN to access Tubi’s free USA vs Paraguay stream tonight.
There are lots of VPN but Norton VPNis the one you can rely on to unblock Tubi and stream USA vs Paraguay like a pro…. and you can save up to 63%.
Advertisement
It’s really easy to use a VPN to watch USA vs Paraguay 2026 on Tubi.
1. Install the VPN of your choice. As we’ve said, Norton VPN is the best choice.
2. Choose the location you wish to connect to in the VPN app. For instance, if you’re visiting Canada and want to watch your free U.S. Tubi stream, you’d select ‘New York’.
3. Sit back and enjoy the action. Head to the Tubi website, sign in, and watch USA vs Paraguay on Tubi for free.
Advertisement
(Image credit: Tubi TV)
Tubi is broadcasting the World Cup matches including the USNMT opener – USA vs Paraguay – from 9pm ET, plus the Fox build-up and halftime analysis, and World Cup replays, highlights and documentaries.
Fox’s World Cup commentary team is led by John Strong & Stu Holden (USA matches), plus Ian Darke, Landon Donovan, Darren Fletcher & Owen Hargreaves. In the studio: Thierry Henry and Alexi Lalas.
Which devices can I watch the World Cup on Tubi with?
You can use Tubi on all of the following devices and platforms:
Amazon Fire TV/Stick and Kindle Fire tablets (Tablets must be 2013 or later) FireTV (newer than 7.1.1000) Amazon Echo Show Android mobile devices (smartphones/tablets) Android TV (newer than 7.1.1000) Apple TV 4th Generation Chromecast Comcast Xfinity X1 Cox Contour Google Nest Hub Hisense Smart TVs iOS devices (iPhones/iPads) LG Smart TVs Nvidia Shield Playstation 4 and 5 Roku platforms Samsung Smart TVs Sony Smart TVs & Blu-ray disc devices TiVo Vizio Smart TVs Web – tubitv.com Xbox One, Series S, Series X
Advertisement
Is Tubi a good way to watch USA vs Paraguay?
This year marks the first time Fox Sports has taken over Tubi for the World Cup – inclusive of streaming Fox’s telecast of the USA vs Paraguay on the platform for all Tubi viewers “live in 4K on compatible devices,” so time will tell.
The platform says it “surpassed 97 million monthly active users and 10 billion streaming hours in 2024.” Which certainly sounds World Cup-worthy.
We test and review VPN services in the context of legal recreational uses. For example: 1. Accessing a service from another country (subject to the terms and conditions of that service). 2. Protecting your online security and strengthening your online privacy when abroad. We do not support or condone the illegal or malicious use of VPN services. Consuming pirated content that is paid-for is neither endorsed nor approved by Future Publishing.
You must be logged in to post a comment Login