text:
How To Disassemble the LEGO Boost Hub?
I can get the hex screws off and pry apart the plastic tabs on the bottom plate, but for the life of me I can't un-clip the back tabs.
Any ideas on where to press/pry?

Yes/No?  Is this the Hub you're talking about? https://i.stack.imgur.com/a7ECr.jpg.

Yeah as rin said, clearing it up with be better

Here's a YT vid on the disassembly, but the still picture shots with no commentary may not be what you need for a good walk-thru.
I don't have a Hub, but wish we all had a pic to make sure we're talking about the same piece.
Regardless, I'm gonna take a crazy shot at it.  Let's Go!
We have two gray rectangles:

Big Gray Rectangle on the Left.
Small Gray Rectangle on the Right.

I think you're stuck here. (See the picture).

So, you took out the two hex screws, (two empty black holes on the Big Gray Rectangle), and you say you can't get further.  Correct?
Instead of trying to remove the Big Gray Rectangle plate, first remove the Phillips screw in the middle holding the Small Gray Rectangle down.
Look at the next picture.

See how the Small Rectangle has a lip design that overlaps, and locks down our Big Gray Recky-reck?
You should be good from here.
EDIT+++++++
Real issue: White Tabs won't release.

Look at this next image of the Big Gray Rectangle removed below.

Focus your attention to the white tabs.
Do you see the notches on the tabs?
The inverse of those notches are on the inside lip of the Big Gray
Rectangle.
When all notches are together it forms a Mechanical Lock.
We have to disengage both tabs together.
Position the entire piece like the picture below.
Get two flat head screw drivers.
Put both screw driver heads on the LEFT side of both tabs.
Hold both screwdrivers in one fist like Wolverine's daughter.
Now pivot to the LEFT which should separate the physical locking of
the two pieces.
You might need your other hand to lift Big Gray    Rectangle  up
and off.

Hi Rin, thanks for responding.
I had previously found this video but as you said the still picture walkthrough is not ideal...
I did get as far as you described (ie removing the battery compartment). My problem comes next. The big rectangular grey plate left is held in place not just by the screws (that I removed) but also by plastic tabs/clips. In your picture above you can see 6 grey ones (2 on north edge, 2 south edge,2 two on the left hand corners) and two white ones on the left side.
Its these white ones that are my problem.I don't know which way to push/pry them in order to unlatch

Alright, I got you ;).  Thanks for coming back with the extra details explaining exactly where you're stuck. I'm going to add a picture and explain exactly how to get around the white tabs.  Give me 15 mins.  We'll get through it easy enough.

I had to do the same last night because the internal motor position A did not work. I ended up pushing a small screwdriver from in between the housing, not from the tabs since I felt that would deform the plastic even more.
Fun fact: to solve my encoder issue, I simply had to nudge the sensor a bit closer to the perforated wheel, using some tweezers. I wonder how it ever worked - or stopped working - in the first place.
Here are some pictures from the parts for future reference:


text:
How I can program a solar panel heliostat?
I want to make a program for an EV3 solar heliostat.
It consists of two motors and a color sensor. I want it to follow the light. The station is fixed.
EV3SolarStation pdf

i want it to follow light .also the station is fixed

Can you provide more details then this, currently it's too vague

Hi @morad ! Could you please provide either a detailed description or a picture of this solar station? Knowing the orientation of the motors and the general idea would allow us to help you better. Thanks!

As far as I see, you have two possible ways of accomplishing this, given that you have already built an Altazimuth mount or any other two-dimension mount from the two motors that can hold the color sensor and point it in any direction.
Calculation
This is the harder way but it grants neater results. It involves taking a precise measurement of the device's location and orientation, setting up a known orientation for both motors as zero, and porting a known solar-tracking algorithm to the EV3 (like this or this). The resulting setup then must not be shut down, moved or rotated since the control of the motors is done by an algorithm which only takes into account the starting conditions (spatial and temporal) and the elapsed time. The accuracy of the EV3 internal clock may also factor into the precision if the project is to be left running for a long time. As an added bonus, you don't need the color sensor at all.
Using iterative methods
This approach requires a lot less intial setup but offers a not-so polished end result. The basic premise is using the color sensor to get an estimation of the amount of the light incoming from the current direction, then comparing it with the measurement(s) from some other direction(s), finally turning toward the higher value.
There are two problems to be solved here: first, the current position of the Sun (or its equivalent if you are indoors) must be found among all possible orientations. This is an example of the mathematical operation known as finding the global maxima of a two-dimensional function on a constrained range, where the two input dimensions are the altitude and the azimuth and the output is the measured amount of light coming from the given direction.
Then, the software must account for the inevitable changes due to the relative movement of the Sun in the sky. Since you have chosen this way and not the first (Calculation), you can not know in advance which direction the Sun will move in. So you can only attempt to find it again after a set amount of time or after the measured brightness drops to (or by) a specified amount.
There are countless ways this approach can be fine-tuned, depending on the precision of the motors, the precision, update rate and measuring range of the sensor, the amount of location and orientation information known beforehand, the required precision of the resulting system, the allowed complexity of the software, etc.
The most basic and a very ineffective system would consist of the following pseudocode:
repeat forever:
    oldBrightness = read(colorSensor)
    movementXAxis = getRandom(-10, 10) // decide on a random direction to turn to
    movementYAxis = getRandom(-10, 10)
    moveXAxis(movementXAxis)           // turn to the new direction
    moveYAxis(movementYAxis)
    newBrightness = read(colorSensor)
    if(newBrightness < oldBrightness)  // if the new direction is worse than the old
        moveXAxis(-movementXAxis)      // then turn back to the old direction
        moveYAxis(-movementYAxis)
    wait(someTime)                     // bask in the sun for a while :)

This of course can be updated with more advanced logic, including but not limited to

paying attention to the amount of difference between the old and new measurements
moving first in larger steps to get a coarse direction and then refine it further with smaller steps
staying pointed in a direction longer if the brightness is higher there
moving continuously in one direction while the brightness is increasing and stopping when it starts to fall
storing directions and corresponding measurements to create a 2D function which can be analysed using mathematical methods to find the best result
storing historical data to predict and account for changes in the long run
(but by now you are practically in the complexity region of the Calculation-way)
etc.

Consult the relevant Wikipedia page for some advanced reading material and as a starting point if you are interested in learning more about the applicable algorithms.

I use mindstorm program for ev3 .I am greatful for you but can you give me a program on mindstorm.i put a link for solar station.thanks very much

https://github.com/diabad/EV3-Solar-Station/blob/master/EV3SolarStation.pdf

@morad sorry, your link seems broken, the browser days the file is too big to display and the PDF reader says it's invalid.

source: Stack Exchange

license: Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/

sort: votes


text:
What is this heavy red LEGO piece with no obvious connectors?

I got a bulk box of LEGO on eBay and this was in it. It has the LEGO logo at either end but the pegs at the bottom don’t connect to anything. It’s heavy, like a battery, but no connectors and it doesn’t come apart. It doesn’t appear to be magnetic. Any ideas?

Keel for red ships.  I had several of those in the early 70'es.

I think it would make more sense to reverse the duplicate direction, since the other question is about a broken version of this piece.

It's a Boat Keel Weighted 8 x 2 x 4.

Which attaches to the bottom of a boat hull, providing sub-surface ballast necessary to keep the boat steady. There are also weighted bricks one may use in the hold of the larger cargo hull, though those are often used on trains.

+1, I had that boat as a kid! Totally forgot about it but instantly recognized the part. :)

I second Henrik's answer: I immediately recognize this part of this boat I used to play in my bath a lot with when I was a kid:

all_licenses: Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/


text:
Where can I find documentation on the LEGO Wireless Protocol for Powered Up devices?
LEGO BOOST and LEGO Powered Up Smart Hubs use Bluetooth Low Energy to communicate to apps. Where can I find documentation on the communication protocol so that I can build my own app for these devices?

LEGO calls this communication protocol the "LEGO Wireless Protocol" (LWP). The documentation is publicly available at https://lego.github.io/lego-ble-wireless-protocol-docs/.
There is also a GitHub repository that provides the source of this website at https://github.com/LEGO/lego-ble-wireless-protocol-docs. Because of this, it seems reasonable to expect this documentation to evolve over time.

Note: WeDo 2.0 is similar, but not the same. The official WeDo 2.0 SDK can be found at https://education.lego.com/en-us/support/wedo-2/developer-kits.

It is too bad that this is the only thing LEGO has on github.

check this repositories also https://github.com/cpseager?tab=repositories - he have few nodejs/python bindings, protocols descriptions and so on


text:
You know you have been LEGOing too long when
Inspired by this webpage on raytracing I was trying to find out whether something similar exists for LEGOing (playing with LEGO). However, I couldn't find any references to jokes like "You know you have been LEGOing too long when you are getting excited about the difference between bright light orange and yellow".
Are you aware of any jokes about playing with LEGO, possibly by people who think that LEGO is for kids only?

...you have "Lepin" written in the center of your dart board.

...you smile when you hear the name Travis

...you know the conversion factor from km/h to studs per second.

...you are worried about LEGOing too long.

...you build a LEGO model of your house with a LEGO model of your house inside a LEGO model of your house ... aarrghhh

You know you have been LEGOing too long when
you have permanent stud prints on your fingers

(That's technically a tattoo pictured, but you get the idea)

Is that a real tattoo?

@Aziraphale Yep, that's LEGO Certified Professional Nathan Sawaya's thumb.

"Thumbs up" for you answer! My plan was to have a brainstorming of this type of LEGO jokes. That is backfiring a bit, I don't really know why.

I know i have when my kids get tired of waiting for me in the Lego store & leave me to go to Starbucks

haha, liked that one. hope they get decaf

When you've been waiting almost 40 years for your favorite colors to become real.  The Lego Movie 2 colors (teal and aqua!!!) and the teal brick separator are like a dream come true.

Nice one! Welcome to Bricks.SE

When you're correcting anyone and everyone that says "Legos" regardless of their age.
When you're editing every question and answer I post to correct Lego to LEGO. :P
When your Lego collection is worth more than your car and/or house.
When you have an entire room in your house dedicated to Lego.
When you want to show every child and parent at the PAB wall how to get the most in their cup, but usually manage to keep your mouth shut.
When you spend more time sorting pieces than building with them.
When the "book" collection is your house is 90% Lego manuals.
When your Lego collection is larger than your kids collection.
When you buy multiples of sets "just for the parts".
When it's mandatory to walk down the Lego isle in any store that has one.
When you can't complain about your wife's shoe collection because it pales in comparison to your Lego collection.
When you have developed a legitimate hatred of stickers in Lego sets. Either because it seems "cheap" or, no matter how perfectly you apply them, some will wither and die with age.
When you've rolled up to the check-out with a shopping cart overflowing with storage drawers and/or containers.
When your fingertips are numb from pulling 1000's of Lego pieces apart, but it doesn't stop you.
Ok, I should stop now...

:) Guilty as charged with #2, but if you care: https://bricks.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/314/do-we-agree-on-how-to-capitalize-lego?noredirect=1&lq=1

I am sure you are talking about your kids' collection and not about your kids collection :)

@Aziraphale -  That took me a sec.  Yes, my collection of children isn't nearly as large as my collection of Lego.  LOL, that's an important apostrophe!  That's too funny, I'm leaving it :)

...when you´re a dedicated AFOL and cannot laugh about Lego jokes

This has a deep truth, indeed.


text:
What set do these large white pieces with Technic pins and an orange winch come from?
I found this at home with many other scattered parts and set, but I'm unsure what this one belongs to. What set is it from?

It looks like part of a Jack Stone 4618-1: Twin Rotor Cargo

Alexander O'Mara answered it quite well but if you are looking for instructions as well, then toysperiod have you covered.


text:
What is this LEGO Star Wars Disney box with "5 items"?
Someone sent me this picture, asking me what this LEGO Star Wars box is.

It apparently doesn't have an item number, and it just says "5 items" ages 6+. What items might it contain?

This was a promotion for holders of the Black VIP Card,
between the 17th and 19th of December LEGO allowed US and Canadian shoppers at their online and bricks and mortar stores the opportunity to add a free branded box containing five polybagged minifigs to their shopping cart if they spent $75 on LEGO Star Wars set
it contains
Hoth Han Solo (5001621)
Stormtrooper Sergeant (5002938)
Admiral Yularen (5002947)
Scarif Stormtrooper (40176)
DJ (40298)

Bricklink
https://www.thebrickfan.com/lego-star-wars-box-5005704-promotion-live-on-shophome/
http://www.rebelscum.com/story/front/LEGO_5005704_Free_Star_Wars_Box_182741

Interesting, I wonder if 5005704 is on the box somewhere.


text:
Capture video stream from LEGO Studio Camera (Logitech USB webcam) in ev3dev?
Once upon a time, LEGO made a digital camera for the LEGO Studios and Mindstorms line. Internally it's an old USB Logitech camera repackaged in a LEGO housing.

It could also be used with the old LEGO Mindstorms software, to do some very weak video recognition when connected to a PC.
Fast forward some years, and Mindstorms are much more powerful, and even have a USB port, which this camera can be attached to, as some people have done.

When used with ev3dev, it's even possible to take some low-res pictures with it using a CLI tool like fswebcam.
However, I'd like to use it as a webcam, and capture a constant video stream from it, so I can use it in competitions where only official LEGO parts are allowed. Seems easy enough, but I've so far been unsuccessful.
It seems that OpenCV doesn't support the camera, because it uses an unusual pixel format encoding. Has anyone found a good solution for capturing a constant video stream? Something better than repeatedly calling fswebcam and parsing the output file (which would be unnecessarily slow).

Can you verify which model of Logitech camera is inside?  If so you may be able to find archived drivers for it and see if they work. Also, what operating system are you running? I have had pretty good luck with Windows backwards compatibility.

@JohnnyB In order to run on the brick, it would need to be compatible with an OS the brick can run, like the ARM-based Linux of ev3dev. Any old drivers for the "046d:0850 Logitech, Inc. QuickCam Web" wouldn't help.

So you want to run it directly from the brick? I didn't catch that part...

Since I'm no software engineer my solution would be to retrofit the insides with known compatible hardware. Cheating? Maybe... but it isn't like the original hardware inside was actually Lego to begin with.  The mention of potentially using "compatible software" would seem to be already stepping out of bounds with "only official Lego parts", since it didn't come packaged with it. So...

Fswebcam on ev3dev should already be using a v4l2 API backed by a v4l2 compatible driver.
The first thing I would look at is v4l-info to understand the pixel formats supported.
Next, I would try ev3dev OpenCV with a known good webcam - if it fails OpenCV may just be built without webcam support.
If OpenCV works with other webcams and v4l-info shows the info, you may have to patch OpenCV to understand the pixel format. Potentially you could patch the Lego camera driver to speak a format OpenCV already understands. With either approach you could do the development and testing on a desktop (might be faster than building OpenCV from source on ARM9)


text:
Replace Battery in LEGO Dino Attack Light-Up T-Rex Head?
Is it possible to replace the battery of the LEGO Dino Attack T-Rex head?

There's a button on the top of the head that makes the eyes and tongue light up red, presumably via a red LED.
There doesn't seem to be any obvious way to take it apart like other light-up LEGO elements from the era. Is it possible to disassemble this element and replace the batteries?

There is one head on Bricklink with empty battery. Maybe there is really no way to replace it? I don't have this head, do you know where exactly the battery is located?

@Aziraphale I'm pretty sure it's somewhere in the black top piece, but otherwise, no I haven't tried forcing my way into one yet to know where exactly it is.

I'm tempted to purchase one of these just to see if I can figure it out.  I guess if it breaks we'll have our answer :)

Look closely at the dino's head. Here you can see little aperture that splits T-rex's upper jaw on half. On this picture I'm showing you what I mean. https://i.stack.imgur.com/Bfd4v.jpg I think that's the "ticket" to replace battery without destruction, isn't it? Just use pocket knife to open. Will it work?

No, but I'm going to buy one set and try.

I was wondering the same thing as sorting out our sons lego and was wanting to replace the batteries. Doesnt seem any way in

Unfortunately after attacking this piece from every angle with some plastic opening tools, I'm quite certain there is no non-destructive way to open this piece.
I tried slipping a spudger in every seam where the plastic joins and was unable to find anywhere I could get any leverage, or even push it in more than a few millimeters.
Even the jaw piece is held on by a cylinder of plastic running from cheek to cheek. There isn't a good way to photograph it, but here's an illustration to show you what I mean.

Based on this experience, I believe it is held together by single-use plastic clips that snap into place on the inside without any way to detach them, short of breaking them. I do not think it is glued together, because the two halves do shift a tiny amount under pressure, and some points were much more resistant to inserting a spudger than others (perhaps because a clip is in that area).

You're dissapointing me! You couldn't wait for expert's answer and you answered yourself!

Self answering is encouraged on the Stack Exchange, information is valuable no matter if original author found it, or someone else. And you should not use "answer" field for criticism. That's what comments are for.


text:
What can I do with all my brick separators?
Since LEGO has started adding a brick separator to each of their larger sets, I have more brick separators than I know what to do with.

Due to inflation, they also aren't really worth anything to try to sell some of them off (some BrickLink stores even given them free with each order), so what are some other things I can do with them? Any clever builds I can use them in?


text:
How can I assemble 2 opposing gears so that the axle rotations are perfectly parallel?
Due to the way all the modern LEGO gears are perfectly quarter-turn symmetrical, there doesn't appear to be any way to assembly 2 opposing gears such that I get a 2 perfectly parallel axles.
This image illustrates the problem:

When one gear it perfectly centered, the other gear is rotated half a tooth.
How can I get 2 opposing gear's axles to be perfectly parallel? Are there any older or special gears that are useful here? Otherwise, are there any good workarounds?

Do you have any restrictions on the maximum distance of the gears or similar?

@Wrzlprmft No necessarily, just that they turn in opposite directions.

How can I get 2 opposing gear's axles to be perfectly parallel? Are there any good workarounds?

You could use an idler gear. It will even out the offset.
Yet, at the same time, it (or any odd number of idler gears) will cause both axles to spin in one direction.

On the other hand, two (or any even number of) idler gears will not affect the asynchrony of the axles, but will bring back the offset.
Then again, placing a single idler gear crosswise will compensate the offset without changing the desired clockwise/ counterclockwise movement.

Besides, here's two 8 tooth idler gears in line. Both axles seem to be perfectly in parallel to each other.

Unfortunately, that's actually because of the large amount of play involved. So this solution just benefits from the wiggle and does not run too reliably.
Edit:

Are there any older or special gears that are useful here?

At least theoretically.

Having an uneven number of teeth, these nowadays obsolete gears from the early 70s would work as well.
As you can tell from the overlapping grey gears, the axles are quite parallel (minus some backlash).

Thanks for sharing. Your second solution is by far the best I've seen - low backlash, adjustable spacing between the outputs, and easy for input.

If you use a crown gear or bevel gear to connect your gears twice perpendicularly, they are exactly opposing each other, turn in opposite directions, and are parallel (if the respective axle is aligned to the coordinate system of the construction). Like with all gear-to-gear connections, you have a little wiggle room that may exceed half a tooth.

If you want the opposing gears next to each other, you can use further gears attached to these (coming with yet more wiggle room).

You could use a belt system to get a perfect, parallel rotation. The chain links used in this video are #3711 and the gears appear to be the same as the ones shown in your example.

There doesn't seem to be an easy way to get the gears to turn in opposite directions without the use of gears (without that half tooth lag).
Two high friction, Technic rubber wheels, placed directly against each other will rotate almost perfectly. Although they might de-synchronise after many revolutions.

What about a clutch gear ? It can help with its center axis that can slip.


text:
Is this non-disassemblable LEGO instruction step real?
I've seen this image shared a few times around the internet as an example of a LEGO instruction step that assembles pieces in such a way that they cannot be disassembled (at-least not without some serious strain on the parts).

If one were to insert that Technic axle into that hole, it would sit flush inside holding the other red piece in place, and since the black piece wraps around the back, it would not be possible to slide it off the axle without some substantial bending.
Trying to find the source of the image has proven difficult, and those who share it don't ever seem to include the source of the image.
Is this from a real LEGO set's instruction, or is it faked?

Last time I remember looking at one of those axle-joiners, there was a hole of a small diameter that a toothpick might be able to poke the axle out through. Is that the case?

@Eric In the red piece yes, but it would be covered over by the solid black piece. You would have to bend it some to do that (which is probably the best way to try to remove it).

Oh wow, I missed that the left end is solid, and assumed it was an axle hole.

It turns out it is real, just not from a single set itself, but from the official instructions for a combo-model between Exo-Force models 7700-1: Stealth Hunter and
7701-1: Grand Titan to make Mountain Warrior.

You can find the pictured step on page 26 of the instructions.


text:
Looking for sets to use as components of a 1930s - 1940s European city
I'm planning to build a 1930s / 1940s European city (like Paris, London, Prague, ...).
As buildings, I'm currently going for modulars that could pass for pre-1950 European buildings, possibly with some customizations.
As cars, I currently have the Oxford classic car set & the car from Enlighten's Special Mission Zero set. In addition, I just bought the LEGO Shanghai Chase set, the LEGO Winter Village Station set & Enlighten's Sunshine Hotel for the cars in those sets.
Could anyone of you recommend some specific sets, besides the ones already mentioned, that would be suitable for a 1930 to 1950 city theme and could help me add more detail to my city?
Besides buildings & cars, I'm thinking of details like fountains, statues, benches, kiosks, bus stops & other details that could fit in a European city from between 1930 & 1950 and give it just a bit more character. Also interior details like bedrooms, living rooms or kitchens would be welcome.
As you may have noticed in my choice of cars, I don't care that much about the brand. I'm OK with buying either LEGO or any other brand, as long as the quality is good enough. What's far more important to me than the brand, is that the elements fit into a 1930 to 1950 setting and that they give my city just that little extra...

What about the 75930 Indoraptor Rampage for an almost timeless mansion? Without the raptors it is not too expensive.
The 10228 Haunted house could provide a good basis for a rebrick of a nice mansion on the hill just outside of your city. However, this one is ALWAYS expensive, as you probably know.
For many nice little ideas for everyday items and a MOC city, check out LionBricks' Youtube channel.

Thanks for the suggestions. Although I'm already aware of both sets you mentioned, I very much appreciate your input. — The 10228 Haunted house is definitely a set I'm considering. I'm not so sure about the 75930 Indoraptor Rampage set, though. It's just the front or a building, really, and even as a front I feel it's a bit lacking in detail. I'd rather go for the 76108 Sanctum Sanctorum Showdown instead, which similar in size & price but has a more refined look-and-feel IMO.


text:
The controversy around clone brands
The origin of the self-locking building bricks
Hilary Page was born in 1904 in Sanderstead, England. Along with several partners, Page decided to go into the toy business in 1932. In 1936, he began manufacturing Kiddicraft ‘Sensible’ toys using new injection moulding technology. Among them was an Interlocking Building Cube, for which he received a British patent in 1940.
After WW2, Page designed and produced the Kiddicraft Self-Locking Building Bricks. These were smaller, refined versions of the Interlocking Building Cube. Bricks could be stacked on each other and were held in place by studs on the top. The bricks also featured slits on their side that allowed panel-like doors, windows or cards to be inserted. He patented the basic design, a 2 X 4 studded brick, in 1947. This was later followed by patents for the side slits (1949) and the baseplate (1952), designs featured in exhibits at the Brighton Toy and Model Museum.
Example of a Kiddicraft set:

How Lego "stole" Kiddicraft's ideas and purged Page's name
Ole Kirk Christiansen and his son Godtfred became aware of the Kiddicraft brick after examining a sample, and possibly drawings, given to them by the British supplier of the first injection moulding machine they had purchased. Realising their potential, Ole modified the Kiddicraft brick and in 1949 marketed his own version, The Automatic Binding Brick.
Example of an Automatic Binding Brick set:

Automatic Binding Brick became Lego brick in 1953. So, basically, this means that Lego actually started off as a direct knock-off of Kiddicraft.
Separated from his wife, and with the stress of his business ventures, Page committed suicide in 1957. British Lego Ltd. was set up in late 1959 and the first sets were sold the following year. Lego eventually acquired the rights to Kiddicraft in 1981. In an out-of-court settlement, Lego paid £45,000 to the new owners of Page's company Hestair-Kiddicraft. It subsequently purged all references to Page and Kiddicraft from its published history.

The rise of the Chinese clone brands
Lego filed its first patent in 1958. Several other patents would follow. However, these patents had all expired in 1989. And ever since then, a number of companies have produced interlocking bricks nearly identical to (and compatible with) Lego bricks.
Especially in China, a wide range of brands have popped up, including (but not exclusive to) Banbao, Lele, Lepin, Kopf, XingBao, Englighten, Kazi, Gudi & Ausini. Some brands, like Lepin, blatantly copy LEGO sets in every detail, clearly enfringing European & American copyright law.
Most brands, however, produce their their own sets, with their own unique designs. This includes anything from medieval or city themed sets to complete modular buildings. Many of these brands also include themes Lego avoids, like WW2 or Vietnam era military themes.
Example of an Ausini set:

Example of a Kazi set:

My question
In the AFOL community, I've noticed a great amount of hostility (even outright hate) against Chinese clone brands. Both companies producing such clone brands and the people buying them are often labeled anything from mildly immoral to pure evil, because they supposedly "steal" from Lego or the companies it licenses from.
However, considering Lego itself started out by blatantly copying the design of blocks that were parented by Kiddicraft & tried to hide these facts from its customers in decent decades, how does that make Lego any better? Is not Lego just as guilty of violating another company's IP? If "stealing" another company's IP is evil, does that not make Lego just as evil?
Why does Lego get a pass for copying another brand and thereby possibly even contributing to the suicide of the original creator? Why does Lego get a pass for trying to hide the history of self-locking building bricks prior to Lego?
Is it not utterly hypocritical to be so hostile against Chinese clone brands for cloning Lego designs while Lego would not have existed if it not were for doing the exact same thing with another brand?

I think there's a core of a good question here. Would you object to an edit to cut down on fluff and rhetorical questions?

@AlexanderO'Mara : I added all of the "fluff" and "rhetorical questions" to provide a context wherein to frame my question. I believe this context is important, considering the controversial nature of both Chinese clone brands and Lego's origin. While I don't mind your improving my question per se, I'd rather not see any important context get lost.

This question looks more like a covered (and loaded) opinion piece, but I will bite. Although LEGO may have been inspired by the Kiddiecraft prototype, LEGO bricks are not direct copies of the Kiddiecraft and other similar designs that were released by various companies in the 1930s. Kiddiecraft's bricks and similar toys were hollow on the underside with nobs on their tops. They didn't really connect well as the only thing keeping them together was the edges of the bricks.
LEGO's unique contribution to the interlocking brick were the tubes underneath the bricks, which allows a sturdy and versatile connection. This is what LEGO received a patent for. In addition to the original LEGO brick, LEGO continues to design and manufacture thousands of different elements to make up their building system. To say that they are clones of Kiddiecraft and similar early brands is simply incorrect. Kiddiecraft and other early toy companies only made square and/or rectangular bricks. LEGO uses thousands of other unique pieces in their sets.
As far as other companies making construction toys with interlocking bricks, most LEGO fan have no issues with other construction toys, as long as they are high quality, and don't blatantly rip off LEGO's designs. There is a big difference between a company like Mega Construx, Oxford, Kre-O, etc. that releases their own designs, vs. a company like Lepin that simply copies LEGO sets and releases them as their own. The former would be referred to as legitimate construction toy brands, and the latter as clone brands or knock-off brands. Construction toy brands are perfectly legal. Clone brands are not.
It's just like there are many car brands. Are they clones of each other? To some extent, yes. Cars often use the same or similar components, and they need to follow certain standards to be legally running on our roads. So they will look similar in many ways. And historically, there are carts, wagons, chariots and other four-wheeled vehicles that preceded them and inspired the modern car design. To say that a modern Ford is just a clone of a wagon from the middle ages and therefore they have no right to fight someone who tries to rip off their current design wouldn't work well as an argument.
LEGO (and other legitimate construction toy manufacturers) have their own set designers, own part designers, they do their research, they work with children and collectors to see what they like, pay their taxes, provide excellent customer service, stand behind their work, and make an effort to be valuable contributors to society. Knock-off companies, on the other hand, simply try to profit from the hard work of others. They notice something is popular, so they copy it, and sell a cheaper version of the same product. (Of course they can do that, as they don't have to take the same risks and pay the same expenses as a legitimate company would).
This doesn't just happen to LEGO. It happens to manufacturers of  cars, shoes, bags, watches, and a myriad of other items. If we, as a society, let knock-off companies get away with blatant stealing just because they can offer us cheaper prices, legitimate companies will simply loose the incentive to produce anything valuable and may even go out of business. Why bother hiring educated and talented designers, why use the best quality manufacturing facilities and raw materials, why care about what people want, when all their hard work is going to be stolen anyway? If we want to advance (or even just maintain) as a society, we need to protect the work of those who provide original contribution and substantial value. There are always going to be people who have no problem with stealing from others. It is in our best long-term interest not to encourage them by supporting their activities.
Hope this helps a little and gives some food for thought. I'm sure others will also share valuable insights. Play well! :)

Although with cars it's even more confusing due to the shared ownerships - a Skoda Fabia looks similar to VW Polo because they are basically the same car with slightly different curves, with Hyundai and Kia it's even worse: the Venga and IX20 (for example) are exactly the same car, just sold under a different marque with different warranties.

How are the original "Automatic Binding Brick" bricks not direct copies of Kiddiecraft's original patented design? The look identical, including the slit on the sides!

There were may similar "binding bricks" in the 1930s. Kiddiecraft and LEGO weren't the only ones. Kiddiecraft only had a patent for the UK. Other similar companies were patented in the US and elsewhere. LEGO had their own patent in Denmark with an improved design. In addition, they bought the Kiddiecraft patent. These are perfectly normal business dealings.

No, Kiddiecraft and LEGO weren't the only ones to make "binding bricks". But the patented ones sold by Kiddiecraft were identical to the parented ones Automatic Binding Brick sold.(-> Automatic Binding Brick would later become Ego Brick). This was decades before Lego bought these patents and years before Lego patented its "new and improved" bricks.

John, one other thing you might consider in your research, is that in the past companies used to be more regional. A product that was manufactured and trademarked in one country only focused on distributing their product in that country and they were happy with that market share. It was common for someone seeing a product in their travels, and than taking it back home to their own country and building something similar or even the same and making this their business. Normally the activities of the original company and the later company didn't clash, as they worked in different markets.

... continuing from my previous comment... Now, that we live in a global economy, rules are quite different. Companies have to patent their products in all the regions they want to operate in to protect their rights. So, when you look at events that happened a long time ago, it is important to consider the landscape people and businesses operated in at that time. Laws were different, business practices were different, and people's attitude to business was different as well.

@TheBrickBlogger : How is your argument different from that of someone claiming that American slavery during the 19th century was totally fine because it was totally legal back then and business practices were different back then? If slavery is immoral today, doesn't that mean it was just as immoral back in the 19th century? Much the same, if blatantly copying someone else's product is immoral today, doesn't that apply to the 1950s as well?

Ah, that's a very interesting question that philosophers have been pondering over for ages! In general, it is best not to use (and definitely not to try to enforce) our own morals and standards on other people and societies. We may not agree with them, we may even be repulsed by them, but we can't expect them to just accept our standards. This is why education is so important. We can show what we feel is a better way. And, hopefully, we will also be open to even better ways that are presented to us. People centuries from now will probably look at us like we were barbarian cavemen. :D

@TheBrickBlogger : There's already quite some people out there who consider modern copyright & trademark laws a form of legal extortion that only favors corporations and stifles innovation in a multitude of ways. And they would argue that Chinese cloning of Western products is some form of poetic justice. Either way, I guess it's fair to say that in the end legality and morality are two distinct concepts and should never be confused with one another!

Hm... yeah, I read interpretations like that myself. It's a complex issue that I don't think is so black and white. Chinese clones effect regular people too. To stay on topic, Chinese clone brands also rip off designs from ordinary LEGO fans without any credit or sharing of profits. A lot of LEGO fans no longer share pictures of their beautiful designs because of this. It's quite sad...

@TheBrickBlogger : I don't get that. As an open source programmer, I feel honored when someone else uses my code in their project. And that includes commercial projects. So what if other people make money based on some code I wrote? All great works are created by men who stand on the shoulders of giants...

Yes, that's a way to look at it, but many people don't feel that way. They design something with thought and passion, and they're not happy that someone else profits from their work. In general, it's best to ask permission. Some people will feel like you, and will be happy to share, while others prefer to keep their personal projects personal. Nothing wrong with either way. And it may also depend on the project. Michael Jackson didn't mind Weird Al parodying his songs, but he asked him not to parody Black or White, as he felt it was a too important subject.

@johnslegers If you release all your work under the most permissive of licenses (or without any license) then great. However many licenses (including for example the one here on Stack Exchange) request recognition of the original work (even if that is just a credit somewhere in the source code) or force you to release your work as open source too.

@Zhaph-BenDuguid : All my open source code is MIT licensed. I realize that not everyone does that. And I respect their choice. But I do believe that this sort of protective attitude people here in the West have over their own creations is bad for innovation, really, and that this (IMO anti-social) atttiude is fueled mostly by corporations who do not have our best interests in mind. But that's just my very, very personal opinion...

@johnselegers and the MIT license requires some (albeit very minimal) recognition (e.g. "this product includes code licensed under the MIT license") and you would therefore be within your rights to enforce that if you found non-compliant usage. It sounds like you wouldn't, but you could. There's also a reason why a lot of sensible people are arguing against the patentability of software :)

@JohnSlegers I agree with pretty much all of your arguments. I find the Lego purism offputting when I'm trying to build a brick collection for my son. So the more bricks for the buck I get, the happier he is (assuming the quality is nearly the same, and I agree with you it nearly is these days).

I wonder though if you feel it's moral for clone brands to release exactly the same set as Lego while Lego is still marketing theirs. I think that pretty clearly violates Lego's rights and discourages them from hiring quality designers to design their sets, and even posting their instructions online. Selling clones of out-of-production sets, on the other hand, seems perfectly fine to me (copying box art exactly is not though - they should just reference the Lego set name and be upfront about it being a copy of an out-of-production set).

@MattChambers : People would stop buying brands like Lepin, Bela, Lele or Decool and buy LEGO instead if only LEGO would sell its pieces at a reasonable price. The reason these clone brands are so successful, is because LEGO is so very overpriced and focuses too much on the AFOL market rather than actual kids. Chinese clone brands sell to the niche market of customers who (or who have kids that) want experience the joy of building with LEGO blocks but who can't afford LEGO's exorbitant prices and/or who don't care about collector's / resale value. (continued)

@MattChambers : (continuation) Many - if not most - people who buy aforementioned clone brands wouldn't buy LEGO because they can't afford to buy LEGO instead, and in absence of such clone brands they'd get a different hobby or give their kid(s) a different kind of toy. Others buy LEGO sets as collector's items / investments and then buy the same set from a clone brands for display purposes. Still others buy only clones of discontinued sets and always by genuine LEGO for sets LEGO still produces. etc. etc. (continued)

@MattChambers : (continuation) From a customer's perspective, it's great to have the choice between an A-brand (LEGO) and B- or C-brand derivatives for the exact same product. But does that make it moral? Is it ever moral to just watch someone 'else do a lot of hard work, wait until they're finished, then copy their output and make profit off those copies? Well, if we look at other industries, we see this happening all the time. Even in the pharmaceutical industry, we have "generic drugs", being sold as cheap alternatives to branded drugs once those branded drugs lose their patent. (continued)

@MattChambers : (continuation) As a software programmer, photographer & graphic designer, I consider 21st century IP laws very much outdated in light of modern technology. It has become very easy to copy, remix or sample IP, but laws restrict this copying, remixing & sampling in a very arbitrary manner, favoring the interests of large, established corporations & harming creators. From this perspective, one might argue it is modern IP law that is immoral & that Chinese clone brands are doing nothing wrong. One might even argue that they are in some way a form of counter-cultural resistance ;-)

@TheBrick this was especially true in the days of independent craftspeople, before mass manufacturing. In those days, 90+% of what mattered in a shoe was its individual craftsmanship - how well the leather had been tanned, how masterfully the cobbler had stitched it, etc. Design was mostly an extra and apprentices were taught to follow the designs of the masters. Individual quality was what sold product. Nowadays, most of the real value in a product is the intellectual property on the design. Most any factory can make it.

Page was owner of the patent only for Great Britain, allowing LEGO to use the design worldwide. Buying a "rival" company (Kiddicraft) later on is nothing unusual in business history. Therefore, blaming Page's death on LEGO does not make much sense.
Regarding chinese brands, one has to make a difference between using a compatible plastic brick system (which everyone is allowed to do) and copying complete sets, including minifigs and the logo (which is illegal). Some clone brands create sets that LEGO fans would like to see not only as MOCs but as official LEGO sets. There is nothing wrong with compatible systems even if the quality often is lower than LEGO standards.
So, LEGO and Lepin cannot be compared in this way. Lepin is illegal, selling Lepin products is illegal.

If selling Lepin products is illegal in China, why do the Chinese government & AliExpress allow the sale of this brand? And if it is not illegal in China, how is the sale of Lepin products being sold in China any different from Lego selling a clone of patented Kiddicraft blocks in Denmark?

As Aziraphale said; Kiddiecraft was patented only in Great Britain, and they later sold their patent to LEGO. The patent of the original brick design no longer belongs to Kiddiecraft. It is perfectly legal for companies to buy and sell their products, patents, or even their entire business.

LEGO does not sell Kiddiecraft blocks. I'm not sure where you got that idea. LEGO has their own unique brick design that is significantly different from the original Kiddiecraft design. In addition, Kiddiecraft no longer owns even their original the patent. They sold it to LEGO.

@TheBrickBlogger : As I explained in my question, the "Automatic Binding Brick" blocks were a blatant rip-off of the original patented Kiddiecraft design. The blocks look identical. And yes, Lego eventually acquired the rights to Kiddicraft... in 1981. That's decades after they did their blatant rip-off. All this is explained in my question, which you apparently didn't bother to read.

Hm... no need to get upset, and I did read your post. As it was pointed out by several people here, Kiddiecraft was only trademarked in the UK. There were a number of other companies who made similar binding bricks in several countries. Kiddiecraft and LEGO were not the only ones. If a product is not trademarked in a region, the original company will either have to go through the effort of trademarking it, or risk their product getting copied. It's how business works.

@TheBrickBlogger : So if China decides that Lego's trademarks & licenses don't apply to the Chinese market, does that mean it's OK to sell Lepin in China?

Trademark laws are very complex and there are lots of nuances to them. It also takes a while to apply laws and rulings even after they are sorted out. LEGO recently won several cases against Chinese cloners, including Lepin, which you can read about in the LEGO news room: https://www.lego.com/en-sg/aboutus/news-room/2018/november/lepin-case/

@TheBrickBlogger : Only 18 Lepin sets are actually impacted by the lawsuit it lost against Lego. All other Lepin sets can still be sold and are still being sold in China. So as long as those sets are not explicitly banned by Chinese law, does that mean you're OK with these sets being sold in China?

As I mentioned, trademark laws and procedures are very complex and it's hard to wrap our everyday brains around it. Even lawyers who are not versed in trademark laws wouldn't try to interpret a complex case like this. But in short, my understanding is that those 18 sets are just the beginning. The case is ongoing.

I think that the whole issue is a bit complex.
With clone bands, there are many things to consider:

Are they producing original set designs, or are they copying LEGO set themes and designs to some extent?
Are they producing direct copies of LEGO sets? Especially rare, old, or otherwise valuable items?
Are they making sets about themes which they did not legally license from a third party, while LEGO did?
Is their product compatible, or incompatible with LEGO (for better or worse)?
Do they just use the original brick design (expired patent), or are they also copying other modern element designs (active patent or copyright?) ?
Are they producing quality elements, or just some cheap junk that doesn't even stick to itself?
Do they copy designs from the AFOL community? (Yes, that has happened)

In the knock-off game, there are several different levels of players. Some knock-offs use the brick design to produce original sets. Others go all the way and shamelessly reproduce official LEGO sets. In the middle we find many more companies who copy the designs of LEGO elements and produce sets with varying degrees of similarity to official LEGO sets. The line between expired patent, copyrighted designs, and such can get very blurry, legally and morally.
The related laws are also regional. In some jurisdictions, LEGO-like-products may not be LEGO-compatible to be considered fair competition (I know this was true in Germany, but I'm not sure if it still is). This may impact the opinions of people in that region.
In my experience, those companies that fall on the more-shameless copying end of the spectrum are the ones that gets the most disdain from AFOL community. Of course, one bad brick can spoil the bunch, and leave everyone who makes LEGO-compatible bricks look bad, particularly among those who do not keep up with which companies do which. Some knock-off brands have even been known to copy some MOC designs from the AFOL community directly, which certain doesn't improve relations.
Another thing to keep in mind, the AFOL community is "Adult Fans of LEGO" and not "Adult Fans of Plastic Building Blocks" so it's likely you will find members of the AFOL community to feel much more strongly about this than the general population.
I think it's fair to say many in the LEGO community don't know much if anything about the origin of the Automatic Binding Bricks, but it's also fair to say there are some big differences between that and modern knock-offs. My understanding is that Christiansen also did not violate the rights of the original patent in the country it was issued (although there may still be a moral issue there). For example, Self-Locking Building Brick and Automatic Binding Bricks were not compatible with each other or sold in the same country, so it wasn't like each company was specifically trying to make a product to replace their competitor's product. Should LEGO acknowledge the full origin of the LEGO brick? Maybe, but I think that’s a separate issue from modern-day knock-offs.

Restating my comments from a previous discussion so that they are here (and before this question gets closed as being "primarily opinion based"):
In terms of acceptable practices, it's possibly more to do with timing and globalisation - Looking into some of the LEGO/Kiddicraft aspects, the Kiddicraft patents didn't cover Denmark or Europe (The EU and EEA didn't exist then, so patents wouldn't have been cross-border), and so there was nothing stopping LEGO making and selling in Denmark - they weren't able to sell in the UK though.
The issue now is the so-called "grey" imports of patent/trademark infringing products into these markets. Obviously Chinese brands can do whatever's acceptable within China, but as has been pointed out in other comments by TheBrickBlogger some of these practices are clearly not something that are legal in other markets - it's also been argued that Chinese laws can be somewhat protectionist, finding in favour of local producers even when it's clear that externally this wouldn't hold internationally.
Trademark law requires that the rights holder defends their IP otherwise they can lose their right to it (trademark abandonment) - so TLG will have to be seen to pursue infringers to maintain the strength of their IP.
Many of the clone brands also have much lower quality control, leading to issues with colours (sometimes desirable to add nice variation in large models, sometimes not - and something we're seeing more of with TLG as well) but more importantly in brick clutch and fit.
As TheBrickBlogger points out in their comment (linked previously), some of the companies providing their own sets are owned by parent companies that also own the companies making complete clones (for example Xingbao (星堡) is owned by Meizi Model (美致模型), which is the same company that owns LEPIN).
And even when the sets themselves are (sometimes only slightly) different and do contain some very nice unique elements of their own, there are still a large number of LEGO duplicates pieces that could easily be different, but are identical, for example (all taken from Enlighten).
LEGO have certainly won infringement cases around the Minifigure, I'd assume there are similar marks for the minidoll and other pieces. However, provided those parts and sets are only marketed in regions where those parts are not protected, there's not much that can be done or said. However the issue really is the same one at the heart of the question: LEGO improved upon the original designs for the bricks, and has since spent time and effort (and by extension money) developing these and additional elements, while Enlighten are just taking that work and copying it - when they could have developed their own versions. For example if you're developing an "ancient knights" theme for a Chinese market, why use European styles as the basis for that when you have your own unique culture other than "it's cheaper to use this existing idea rather than develop our own (oh, and then we might also make a few sales into that market even if we don't actively target it)".
For example take the differences between the Mega Bloks figures and LEGO's: the accessories are interchangeable, but the figures are distinct from each other. The same could be done by Enlighten (as other Chinese brands have done to a greater or lesser degree of success), but Enlighten and others have chosen to exactly copy LEGO's designs.

Morning Star:
Waving Pendant:
Classic Castle Helm, Monkey and Bat:
Cherry Minidolls:

I'll admit that I'd like to see more variety, and have been known to buy the odd Mega Bloks Halo and Character Building Doctor Who sets as they were available legitimately here in the UK, which isn't the case with Enlighten or LEPIN.

AFAIK, XingBao is the only company providing their own sets that also has a sister company making complete clones. While I am aware of one set Enlighten pretty much cloned, everything else I've seen from them is original. And for many other brands (like Kazi, Gudi or Ausini) I've never seen them blatantly copy a Lego set at all. So I'm not sure your argument that "many of the companies providing their own sets are owned by parent companies that also own the companies making complete clones" really holds.

(continued) Also, Lego copying Kiddicraft may not have been illegal for technical reasons. But does that make it moral? And if China's law can't prohibit Lego from cloning Lego sets, how is that any different?

Compare LEGO's Black Seas Barracuda with Enlighten's Adventure for earlier examples, a number of the others are incredibly similar, but I'll admit slightly different.

As I said, I am aware of a single set Enlighten "pretty much" cloned. That's the set you're refering to. I can't think of any other Enlighten sets that are equally similar. And the overall quality of their original sets is pretty decent in my experience.

Apologies - they've copied the same one twice (their 308 and 307 are functionally the same from the outside, with different additions - you're right that 308 is even closer to Black Seas Barracuda) - I've updated my answer to note that many of their sets are different, however they have clearly copied a number of other elements that they could easily have developed their own versions of...

Is there any legal problem with copying the design of pieces like the ones you're mentioned? If not, then what's the issue but copying the design of a single piece? As a builder, I love the fact that the pieces of different brands look so much alike, as it provides a consistent look-and-feel when I combine multiple brands in one build.

Most Chinese companies use bricks that are identical to Lego's, but the sets they sell are their original designs. So you can't really say that they are just taking Lego's work and copying it. They are doing their own innovation, and by using bricks that are identical to Lego's, these brands are 100% compatible (that means, also in terms of look-and-feel). Aside from possible legal issues, I don't really see how anyone can be against that.

But again... Aside from possible legal issues, what's the problem with Enlighten using minifigs & accessories that look identical to Lego's? What is the problem with them having their own Knights theme, alongside eg. a military theme or oriental themes? From a customer's perspective, isn't it better to have sets from clone brands that look so much like Lego that they blend in perfectly with your Lego sets rather than a brand (like Mega Bloks) that "stands out"? I love it when I use components from 5 different brands in one build and it all blends in perfectly together!

"aside from possible legal issues" seems to be whole issue here. (I've moved my comment responses into my answer).

There's nothing intrinsically wrong with having their own knights theme, but why is it based on European questing knights, and not on Quin (i.e. terracotta army) or China vs Mongolia or even just Samurai? They have a rich warrior history (including the invention of gunpowder and cannons, the great wall, etc.) that to limit themselves to copying LEGO exactly seems a shame.

Enlighten's "War of Glory" theme is actually more inspired by Tolkien than by  Lego's medieval themes. And the designs of the actual sets are both pretty awesome and original looking IMO. But yes, they don't seem to have a full-fledged oriental theme. However, other brands (like XingBao & Oxford) already fill that niche. Terracotta army minifigs also exist and are produced by yet another brand (Kopf). An the quality of each of these brands is pretty high. I think you're underestimating how much the Chinese clone brand market has evolved over the last couple of years!

Indeed (Battle with the Ancient Tree, and dwarf beard/helms that again look much like LEGOs, albeit in that case with my desired improvement of detachable horns), however they aren't really sold over here in the UK that much (if at all, presumably due to fear of litigation - the only sets we tend to see are the terrible fake minifig versions) I don't really see them much. Thier "Creation of the God" theme looks like a mash-up of Ninjago and Legends of China with some interesting nods towards Journey to the West though.

I buy all my Chinese clone sets on AliExpress. Shipping sometimes can take many weeks, but shipping rates to Europe are dirt cheap, as are many of the sets they sell. And you can find literally thousands of individual minifigs over there at about €0.70 ($0.80). While there's definitely still some brands out there with very poor quality, many of these brands produce at a quality that makes them barely distinguishable from real Lego... at a fraction of the cost of real Lego. Thanks to AliExpress, I can finally afford building that city I've always dreamed about...

That might be part of the problem: either a feeling of jealousy based on "I've paid full price for this, and they've got all that for 1/10th" or (the more problematic) passing off of clone brands elements at full market price on sites like eBay and similar (think rare Minifigures, etc.). If the seller is up front and honest about the source, then the buyer can make an informed choice.

And maybe also a bit of snobbism / elitism? It seems to me that an increasing amount of Lego's profits comes not so much from parents buying toys for their children but from speculators & collectors buying sets most parents can't afford to buy their kids. And it doesn't help that Lego has a tendency of discontinuing sets that are still in popular demand... driving up the price in the second hand market. This is in fact one of the reasons Lepin is so popular : they still sell eg. ALL of the modulars, most of them for $50 to $100 (shipping included). For an old Lego modular, you often pay >$500.

FYI, for a really cool oriental set, check out the 3320 piece XingBao brothel. It looks about as oriental as it gets, and it being labeled as a "brothel" or even "whorehouse" gives it just that eccentric touch that makes me really want to own this set. This set is one of several oriental themed sets XingBao is selling, which includes a bank, a theatre, a tea house and a Suzhou garden. The buildings are all between 2900 & 3900 pieces, and they all look pretty awesome IMO.

Cultural differences around intellectual property
The Western World has a very author-centric view of intellectual property (IP) which mostly plays out in copyright law.  We've pushed so hard to protect the "authors" that their monopoly on their creations lasts for decades after they've deceased.  The Eastern World seems to take a very factory-centric view of IP.  If you have a factory you can build it.  The expectation in China is that you will share any improvements to the IP back with the community.  This has been very effective at letting China build the largest manufacturing base in the world across numerous forms of technology.  They don't seem to have any desire to waste time on licensing or policing pirates.  That seems like a natural extension of their fundamental attitude toward IP.  Just as naturally we westerners interpret it as piracy and assume that rule of law is also not important to them.  This is an oversimplification and we might get along better if we understood the other sides priorities and motivations better.
Clone LEGO is often dismal
So I'm obviously not a fan of copyrights that last 100+ years.  One of the things that I've admired about LEGO is that they focused on patenting their early LEGO bricks instead of copyrighting them.  I'm sorry that they were sly about borrowing the idea from a competitor.  I'm glad they were more successful at popularizing it than their competitor.  I'm glad they both had factories to try to succeed with.
As an AFOL that has received some clone sets as gifts now and then I can say that I've been disappointed by the quality every time.  Getting rough spots that need to be filed down doesn't seem fun to me.  Having some bricks that fit and some that don't doesn't seem to show much effort on the cloners part.  Worst of all is bricks that fall apart.  If you can't get the clutch power right you shouldn't have put it in a box.
But there is hope
With comprehensive views like Communist LEGO it seems clear that there are some interesting things happening with clone LEGO.  I can see myself buying more of it someday.  Most of my money will be going for "real" LEGO's because I don't have to worry about quality and I'm very pleased with the creativity they show themselves.  Another reason for sticking with LEGO is the community.  Where's a part or set database for clone brands?  Where's a part and set market like bricklink?  If those things make your life better you should usually stick with LEGO too.
I do think it makes sense to buy things from clone manufacturers when LEGO isn't producing it anymore and there's no reasonable price for it on bricklink.  The main example that comes to mind is the old-style minifig cases.  The new clear ones are ok, but I like the "darker" larger ones from before.  I'm glad that some clone manufacturers have picked this up.  I've also gotten base plates in colors that LEGO won't make.  I got a decent switch cover plate that I would never expect LEGO themselves to make.

You said that you've been disappointed by the quality of clone brands. What brands are you talking about? Sure, Mega Bloks totally sucks. And I can't say I'm a fan of Sluban either. But in my experience, Oxford (a Korean brand) is very impressive. And XingBao (the "legal" sister brand of Lepin) is almost just as good. Sure, not all Asian brands have reached their level of quality yet, but personally I'm rarely disappointed by the quality (especially in terms of value for money) of Chinese brands.

(continued) Adding to this, note that  99% of the pieces used in sets of most clone Chinese brands are identical in terms of look-and-feel to those of Lego pieces. So there's really no need for a database of these brand's pieces. You can replace missing pieces with a Lego piece or mix the pieces of multiple Chinese brands, Oxford & Lego with little to no noticable differences between those pieces. And if you really need just one missing piece, you can often find it on TaoBao or AliExpress (a lot cheaper than on Bricklink), with relative ease, once you learn to find your way on these sites!

I'm not sure of which brands for the sets I have.  The minifig cases from ELiM have been of good quality.

I don't know of many people who claim that knock-offs generally "steal from Lego" (the largest toy company in the world right now). It's probably fair to say Lepin does, given that they literally copy Lego designs brick-for-brick, but other companies like Mega Bloks doesn't.
In my experience, only one thing really maters, and that's quality. Other brands try to undercut Lego by producing lower-quality pieces. In manufacturing, you pay for precision. The smaller your tolerances, the more it costs, and Lego is famous for their small tolerances, as low 10 micrometres.
To save a few bucks, other brands will allow for greater tolerances, and thus produce a lower-quality product, with pieces that are more likely to wear out or not really stick together well in the first place. They also like to cheat a little by producing oversized specialized pieces that make their models look bigger on the cheap, but ultimately leaves you with a piece that has very little reuse value.

Mega Bloks may use oversized specialized pieces that have very little reuse value, but this is not the case for Chinese clone brands. 99% of their pieces are identical to Lego pieces in look-and-feel. And the quality is getting so close to Lego's quality that the quality argument no longer really holds either for most of those brands.


text:
Multiple Powered Up trains on 1 Bluetooth controller?
My daughter got a Passenger Train for Christmas and I converted one of my old 9v trains to run using the powered up system. Is it possible to run the 2 trains independently or concurrently (preferably independently) on the one remote?
I’ve tried all sorts and have struggled to find anything that helps me.

Based on https://bricks.stackexchange.com/q/10486/6174 it seems like there is a 1:1 relationship unless you use some sort of proxy.

This is a video tutorial that describes how to control two motors or hubs with one controller. They are on the same channel so when the plus button is hit, both motors react to it and start rolling. This solution is useful when one needs two or more motors in a larger train.

Each train needs the following two components:

Hub
Train motor

I'll assume you purchased a second set of these to convert your 9V train with, since you're asking how to control both trains using the same remote.
The LEGO Powered Up team has provided an FAQ for Powered Up which contains instructions for how to pair multiple Powered Up Smarthubs with one remote, on either the same channel or different channels:

How can one single BT remote be used to control multiple receivers or switch among them? Will this be possible in the app?
You can link up to 5 devices (Smart Hubs or Smart Controllers) together.
To create a network you first need to connect a Samrt Hub [sic] and a Smart Controller.
First Hub connection
Turn Hub and Controller ON by pressing their green buttons and they will link. The LED will blink white and then shift to same channel color e.g. blue. You can now change the channel color by pressing the green button on the hub and toggle through the 5 channel colors. When turning OFF the Hub or Controller the last connection is remembered and re-established when turning both ON.
Adding Hub to network
With the first Hub and the Controller ON and connected you can add extra Hubs to the network by turning the new Hub ON and then press both green buttons simultaneously on the new Hub and one of the components in the network (Hub or Controller). The new Hub is now added to the network with the same channel color as the currently selected channel. Again toggle to another channel by pressing the green button on the Hub. When more Hubs on different channels are added to the network you toggle between the different channels by pressing the green button on the Controller.
Note: The current Powered UP app supports control of a single train.

Note that when you have two Smarthubs paired with the remote on the same channel, when you press a speed control button on the left side of the remote, both Smarthubs will respond. This is shown in a video by HispaBrick Magazine. This means you'll start both trains concurrently with a single button press. To avoid this:

Change the channel on one of the hubs by pressing the green button once. You can then switch to this channel on the remote by pressing the green button on the remote, and cycle through all 5 channels back to the other hub to control that other hub again.

Or if you want to be able to control each hub independently using each side of the remote without having to change channels on the controller, simply switch the plug on one of the hubs to the other port while both are still paired on the same channel.
The second port is typically used with a different device such as a Powered Up LED Light which you can install into your Passenger Train and you'd control the train motor and the LED light independently; however, it's not possible to have both motor and light controls and control two independent trains all on the same channel.

Ah, your answer is much better then mine! Upvoted. :)

Thanks very much for your detailed response. I have had continued problems linking the second train, it just continues flashing but I will reset everything and try again this evening following the above.

@Stereo: Let me know if it works out!

@LegoSonicBoy. I have tried to pair it as per the instructions (which incidentally is pretty much the way I had bee previously trying) and the second train/hub fails to join the network. The second hub when switched on flashes white but I cannot get it to then pair with either a hub or controller on the network.

@LegoSonicBoy. I have since followed the HispaBrick video you linked and have managed to link the 2 trains to one controller and all is working as desired! I have hunted youtube and failed miserably finding anything that worked for me so thanks for the link.

@Stereo: Glad you got it working! You can mark my answer as accepted by clicking the checkmark under the voting arrows. Oh and welcome to Bricks SE!

According to the LEGO Customer service website, you can control multiple train with the remote control, but not the app. Currently the Powered Up App only controls one Powered Up Hub at a time. Source: https://www.lego.com/en-MY/service/help-topics/digital/device-guides/powered-up/control-multiple
A more specific answer can be found in the LEGO City website: You can run up to 5 trains at the same time from one remote control. There are 5 channels on the remote control (you can tell them apart by their different colors) that can connect to up to 5 Smarthubs. Source: https://www.lego.com/en-us/themes/city/articles/question-06-028c2ae86b684ac78d5c7448e869c88a


text:
Are these old car models legit sets or MOCs?
Are these 4 historic car models legit sets or MOCs? If official sets do you know the set numbers?
How can I add more pictures then one?

These are indeed legit sets of the 70's.
390-2: 1913 Cadillac

391-1: 1926 Renault

395-1: 1909 Rolls-Royce

Only the red car in the top right looks like a MOC version of the red Cadillac  set


text:
Large Lego Ninjago package, no box and no instructions, many red and black pieces
These packages were all unopened. Only package number five came with a Ninjago mini figure.
Could someone possibly be able to get me the box information so I can look up the instructions!

Given the red quarter domes, I'm fairly certain the bricks are from this set:
https://www.bricklink.com/v2/catalog/catalogitem.page?S=70615-1

https://media3.webcollage.net/e7591287200999f3ebb67aeb1d0fe6a13bc25874?response-content-type=image%2Fjpeg&AWSAccessKeyId=AKIAIIE5CHZ4PRWSLYKQ&Expires=1893517796&Signature=t%2BOpkHf7lQPzrB3%2FPzdgFauejow%3D   fire disk match too

Thanks for all your help! Awesome! On the instruction booklet, the Pieces i have match bags five through eight I just don’t have bags one through four do you know of a website that sells just certain bags out of boxes

I'm afraid I don't know of such website and I think it unlikely to exist. You could probably create a "wanted list" on bricklink if you have the time and patience to go through the inventory list and strike out the pieces you have. Not sure if buying the missing pieces on bricklink will eventually be cheaper than buying the set new or secondhand


text:
Can I push the train of 60052
We more like to push trains with hand. There were old ones, like the train of set 2741, where when pushing the engine, the contact became loose between the axis and the cog wheel.
Can I count some similar damage, if we push the engine of 60051 (and 60052)?

I would not recommend pushing the motorized train base for extended periods of times. When you turn the motor, it will generate electricity. Unless that energy has somewhere to go, it will turn into heat. It's probably not an issue to do this a little bit for short periods of time, but I wouldn't do it a lot.
If you wish to make your train a push train, you could replace the base with another non-motorized base.


text:
Help identifying giant blue LEGO Bionicle set
I have what appears to be a giant Bionicle. The head is the size of a small human head almost the size of a mask.
It is blue in colour and in 5 bags. It looks like more than 100 pieces. The instructions and box are lost. No idea what it is.
Any ideas? Can post pics if needed.

Picture would definitely help. There are a number of sets I can think that this might be.

It's better to post pic

Gadunka (8922) came somewhere around 2007, and was part of the underwater themed bionicle sets. When assembled it is quite big. Maybe this is set you were looking for?

Another candidate would be the 8894 Piraka Stronghold or "Lava Chamber Gate":

as it contains the largest Bionicle mask/head piece in blue.


text:
How to install Firmware 1.10E on an EV3 home/retail edition brick
If and how can you install firmware 1.10E on an EV3 brick from an home/retail edition set (instead of an education set)? Updates 1.0E9 are only recognized from the Mindstorm software, also with Education Mindstorm software version.
I am very interested to build projects with makecode.mindstorms.com.

New answer (2020)
The V1.10E firmware is installed using the EV3 Device Manager web page. The instructions are not entirely clear, but if you visit the web page with Chrome (recommended), Safari, Edge, or Internet Explorer, click the Available Bricks (0) button and wait a very long time, it will eventually pop up a dialog asking to download and install an EV3 Device Manager program to your computer. The EV3 Connection Manager program runs in the background on your computer and communicates with the EV3 Connection Manager web page in the browser. After installing the separate background program, the web page will be able to connect to your EV3. Then you can use it to update the firmware. It does not appear that this method gives you the option of selecting which firmware file to use.
Old answer - for retired EV3 Lab software
You can get the 1.10E firmware from the LEGO Education website. Currently, this can be done by clicking the Download Firmware button at the bottom of this page.
In the EV3 programming software, make sure you have a project open (e.g. create a new empty project), then click Tools > Update Firmware.
Click the Show Details button.

Then click Browse and select the firmware file that you downloaded.

Make sure your EV3 is connected via USB and powered on, then click Update Firmware.

For some people, however, the new version does not show up in the EV3 software, and I'm one of them. But I managed to find another way to download it.

I appreciate the answer, but the link for downloading the firmware is no longer on the webpage referenced. I too would like to try makecode.mindstorms.com but appear to be unable to do so without firmware version 1.10E. That firmware version does not appear on the Lego website (https://www.lego.com/en-us/themes/mindstorms/downloads). It only has version 1.09H. Any help would be appreciated.

Thanks for letting me know. I have updated the answer.

The Device Manager page is Forbidden (403)

As of Dec 29, 2022 there is a link to download 1.10E here: https://education.lego.com/en-gb/product-resources/mindstorms-ev3/downloads/firmware-update

For anyone searching in 2021 and looking for a tutorial, I finally found an option that works. Lego's browser based EV3 Device manager will NOT work, nor will the 1.5 version of EV3Lab classroom/home edition software.
I wrote a tutorial in a reddit thread here, and have highlights posted below.

This has only been verified on a windows 10 computer. It should work on any 7,8,10 windows PC, and theoretically on an intel based Mac; I am unsure on an m1.

Download and install the 1.4.5 Lego EV3 lab software from this link here. This is a retired version of the software that still includes the "tools" file menu to allow for manual updates of the firmware.

Download the 1.10E firmware here

Power on and plug in your EV3 to your windows computer.

Open "Tools > Firmware Update"

In the popup, "Show Details"

"Browse" and select the 1.10E.bin file.

Click Update Firmware.

Success!

As a robotics educator, Lego really does not need to make it this difficult. If for whatever reason the below links break, the reddit thread I posted has links to my google drive where I have stored the original 1.10E firmware and installers.

The web-based EV3 manager will not let you upload an 'E' (education) firmware in a Home edition brick. For some reason the latest education version is 1.10E while the home version is stuck to 1.09H.
But you can use the EV3 software to point to a specific file to upload. Version 1.10E is available here: https://education.lego.com/en-gb/product-resources/mindstorms-ev3/downloads/firmware-update (link at the bottom of the page).
If you don't have it already, install the EV3 software available here: https://www.lego.com/en-us/themes/mindstorms/downloads
Launch the EV3 software, select the menu Tools -> Firmware upgrade, then click "Show details". Here you can select a firmware file. Point to the 1.10E firmware that you just downloaded and click 'update'.
Note that I had to shudown and restart the brick once in order to see the EV3 drive on my PC.

Few options:

Official LEGO page here (plus the firmware file)

Very good Reddit tutorial

Lots of details here (in German)


text:
Is EV3 Device Manager still active?
Link to https://ev3manager.education.lego.com/ is broken - will this be fixed?

This sounds like a question for LEGO Education customer support.

Where did you find this URL?

Yes
As of April 2019, The EV3 Device Manager is active. However, if you have not downloaded the Device Manager to your computer, it will not function. Also, make sure that your EV3 is properly connected to your computer with a USB that can transfer information.


text:
My Lego Technic 42082 wheel stuck and can't move
After I finished my 1st manual book, I found out that my crane wheel can't move. May I know which part that I did incorrectly?

LEGO Technic sets are the most complex builds in LEGO's selection, and they are not forgiving. Any little mistake, and the model won't work. LEGO Technic sets are not easy to build, as you have to pay careful attention to each and every step. In addition, if you do make a mistake, the models are not nearly as easy to take apart as regular LEGO sets.
Your issue could be anywhere. It could be a mistake of where you connected a part, you could have used the wrong part in a step, or it could be that you made one or more of the connections too tight.
Unfortunately, there is no way around it; you will have to retrace your steps and disassemble the model until you find the issue. You could take apart the whole thing and start over, or you could reverse your steps carefully, until you find the problem.
To avoid such issues in the future, you should test that everything is still working after each step. In other words, if you are adding working gears in one step, and in the next step you are instructed to add more gears or some other components, test to make sure that everything is still working correctly when you add the additional parts. You should do this after every new section. It makes building a bit slower, but it assures that the finished model is working right.
Although LEGO Technic sets are challenging builds, they are also some of the most rewarding. You can learn quite a bit about mechanics, engineering, and complex machines.

Thanks for your advise. i might need to relook into all part. :)


text:
LEGO Master Builder Academy instructions
My kids picked up a few LEGO sets from the Master Builder Academy series recently that do not come with instructions in the packaging. According to the support team at LEGO.com this series was discontinued in 2011 and no electronic copies of the instructions were ever produced by the company. We are looking for instructions for 20201, 20204, and 20205.
I have googled quite a bit and searched several LEGO fan sites but have been unable to find any scans or other digital copies of the instructions for any of these sets.
Does anyone have or know where to find these? Thanks very much!!

You can find the instruction booklets on BrickLink. They only costs a few dollars. They are not just about instructions. They include a whole curriculum for systematically learning advanced building techniques and building concepts with lots of information, seed ideas, alternate builds, etc. Here are the listings for the for LEGO Master Builder Academy booklets: https://www.bricklink.com/catalogList.asp?catType=I&catString=764


text:
Help Identifying LEGO With A Pink 3(｀(00) ´ )Ɛ Face
I cannot add a picture, but they are green, brown, and pink pieces. One of the pink has what looks like a pig's face.

Other sets with Minecraft Piggy Face Piece Here.


text:
What is this 3 x 8 orange curved piece from?
My dad recently gave me a large box of LEGO pieces that belong to sets. I found two pieces that appear to be the front of a car. I was wondering if you guys could help me out. I would love to know what it came from so I could maybe put it back together.

The pieces are
41750 Wedge 8 x 3 x 2 Open Left.
and
41749 Wedge 8 x 3 x 2 Open Right
(respectively).
Those pieces have only been in the following 2 sets in that color:
3830-1 - The Bikini Bottom Express

7706-1 - Mobile Defense Tank

I'm kinda new here, if the OP wanted to know what the pieces were, would you give them an element ID or would you pick a part number from one of the places that lists parts?

@Raystafarian I'd probably give them an official part number if possible and a link to the part on BrickLink.

@AlexanderO'Mara: could you throw the part ID's in there somehow?


text:
why isn't lego updating the 9V train sets to the current system?
My son is getting to the age where he is ready for the Lego trains. I looked through the City and Train sets. It seems that Lego really recycles the Fire and Police themes over and over again, while the single train segments are still from 1991-1993, making me bid for them on eBay.
Why don't they sell single segment railcars anymore for $20-30? Would love to see the 45xx series refreshed and expanded.

Jason, welcome to Bricks.SE.  Many of us sympathize with your frustration, but we don't work for The LEGO Group so we don't have any insider knowledge.  Sending a note to customer service usually gets a response.  https://www.lego.com/en-us/service

Thought you guys follow it so closely that some one had an explanation of why. Or some theories to why.

It is all a matter of cost versus demand. For tens of years LEGO had a separate train theme, with transformers, special metal rails, lights, switches and individual train cars and full sets. But the cost of maintaining and developing these components did not weigh up against the limited demand there was for these sets. Not many kids (90% of LEGO’s demographic) will want to splurge on all these sets (a single complete set plus some extra track is often enough for them), and the adult audience is loud, but not large enough to make such a complete line profitable.
That is why LEGO scaled back and just releases a few full train sets every few years, plus rails and switches made with a very simple design (involving only cheap plastic). AFOLs can and will design their own train cars/waggons anyway, so that is an avenue you can explore with your son.

It is amazing what the fan community has done with trains in LEGO.  https://bricks.stackexchange.com/a/10271/6174


text:
Can you print a LEGO Powered Up connector with a 3D printer?
Has anyone ever printed a LEGO Powered Up connector with a 3D printer? Currently, I'm using a modified SATA adapter for some LED lights on my train.

Yep.
See my writeup here: https://www.biasedlogic.com/index.php/lego-powered-up-connector/
Done that, works.

Are you talking the new 6 wire cables for the latest launched systems or the old two wire connectors like what was used on the Scout robotics controllers for sensors?
If you are talking the old two wire versions, you might be able to use conductive filament in conjunction with standard PLA to print an insulating strip between the two conductive halves of the connector and get it to work. If you stop the print in the middle and add the wires, the connection might be acceptable to have the wires 3-D printed into the connector.
I have used this method to make 3-D printed led holders that connect the leads of the LED's to the circuit by 3-D printing directly onto the LED's leads. I print the holder so the LED can be inserted into the holder, the leads bent to the surface and trimmed at the edge of the holder. Then when the rest of the holder is printed it melts the conductive filament to the leads and glues the LED into the holder permanently. I have tried insertion into tight fitting holes in the conductive material with poor results. I have tried wrapping the leads around posts of conductive material with moderate results. Melting the conductive filament directly onto the leads makes for the best connection.

With the OP's talk about a modified SATA connector, I think he's talking about the new system, possibly inspired by (something like) https://bricks.stackexchange.com/questions/10441/are-there-powered-up-compatible-connectors-available/10442#10442


text:
EV3 Multiple conditions: wait sensor activation for N seconds or
How to program EV3 to wait for a sensor activation for at most X seconds?
If the sensor is activated in the given time, begin sequence B. If it is not activated in X seconds, begin sequence A.
Explanation:
My robot arrives at point X, then it waits for the ultrasonic sensor activation (if a hand arrives near the sensor - < 7 cm), but must wait only for 10 seconds.
If nothing triggers the ultrasonic sensor within 10 seconds the robot must continue with sequence A.
If, for example, a hand is placed in front of the ultrasonic sensor (<7CM) within 10 seconds the robot must continue with sequence B. Then when sequence B is terminated, the robot should continue with sequence A.
I have tried using loops, switches and asking Gandalf for help but with no success.

Hi @Zerop! I'll try to edit your question to make it a bit better readable, but I have no idea what you could mean by "Gandalf". Could you please clarify your intent? Thanks!

Hi !! sorry was only a joke. Solution is hard to find and i wrote that i have ask help else to Gandalf (lord of rings) hoping in help !!

Okay, then I'll leave the reference intact :)

Similar question: https://bricks.stackexchange.com/q/7822/3498

Here's some pseudocode that does what you need:
Reset timer
Loop block:
    Sensor block, output logical TRUE when condition is reached
    Timer block, output logical TRUE when X seconds have passed
    Logic block, outputs logical TRUE if sensor OR timer is true
End loop when it receives TRUE from the Logic block.
Switch block:
    if sensor = condition, SEQUENCE B
End switch
SEQUENCE A

The sensor and timer blocks' logical data wires are connected to the logic block. The logic block is set to "OR", which ends the loop if either one is true. Then you use a switch to decide whether or not to execute SEQUENCE B, and after that, SEQUENCE A happens regardless.

Thanks for help !! I'll try tonight your solution ! thanks to all

@Zerop No problem! Just to elaborate a bit, the key here is that you're using a loop (instead of a wait block) to wait until either logic signal is true. Then after the loop, you use a switch to act based on which condition ended the loop. You could easily extend this to more than 2 conditions, or use it to wait until BOTH conditions are true, etc. Just a cool programming trick to keep in mind for the future.

MindS1 thanks a lot !!!!! it's worked perfectly !!!!
I had almost arrived near it. What was wrong was the switch block. I used the switch block waiting for a true logical condition instead of waiting for the sensor. Now it works perfectly. Thank you so much for the invaluable help !!

One way would be to use a loop with a counter and a built-in waiting period. In each iteration check the sensor readings: if the value indicates the presence of a hand, exit the loop and start sequence B. Otherwise increment a counter and wait for some time. Finally, if the value of the counter indicates that the 10 seconds have passed, execute sequence A.

In EV3 the pseudocode looks like:

Always surprises me how complex it is to represent simple ideas.


text:
9398 4x4 Crawler front wheels rotate in the opposite direction to the rear wheel
We've just finished 9398 4x4 Crawler. Everything looks good, the motors work but the front wheels rotate in the opposite direction to the rear wheels, they also turn in opposite directions. What could be the problem?

Likely you'll have the differential gears oriented wrong in the front or back section.
The differential gear is this piece:

Please check the instructions carefully and see if the orientation of this piece in the instruction book matches your build.

You're right! This piece was in a wrong position. Now everything works properly. Thanks a lot!

Thank you so much for this post and the responses. I had the same issue with the 42082 crane that was most of the way built, before my son realized that the front and rear axles were turning in opposite directions. After reading your posts and checking the instructions, I began carefully taking the area around the differential apart (there was some slight bending of pieces involved), to flip the front differential piece that was shown in the earlier respondent's photos. Flipping the differential piece fixed the problem and we are back on track.


text:
What is LEGO Xtra?
I've seen a number of small polybags in stores branded LEGO xtra. What are these?

LEGO xtra is a theme of sets that focus on adding play value to your existing sets by providing accessories or play areas.
For example, LEGO xtra Traffic Lights adds 4 buildable traffic lights and a few associated accessories to your city streets:

These sets sometimes feature playmats or baseplates as well, such as the Sea Playmat set:

These sets are reminiscent of the older accessory packs that used to be available some time ago:

LEGO was kind enough to send me a copy of Sea Accessories (40311).

Here are the included parts:

Overall, this is a nice variety of parts that should add to the playability of a beach, marina, or even pirate hideout. If you already have a large collection, there isn't much terribly exciting in there, but I do appreciate the blue and yellow dual-injected bird.
The price per piece of these sets is unfortunately not great. This one is $4 USD for just 24 elements, but the parts that you get are a bit more unique than those found in the Classic parts boxes. They have a focus on adding play value to your existing sets, and often feature larger elements such as animals or vehicles that tend to be more expensive and more add interest to models.

Just out of curiosity, what do you do that Lego sends you free stuff?

@MindS1: jncraton represents the site in the LEGO Ambassador Network (LAN). (He should probably put this in his bio - it's pretty important.)

@LegoSonicBoy explained it well. TLG provides support for us in various ways. They sent me this set to review as the representative of our community. We do try to spread this support around the community as much as possible (e.g. https://bricks.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/432/2018-annual-support-proposals ), but for a single $4 review set I just took care of this one myself.

@jncraton That's super cool dude, thanks for your work!


text:
Which programming environments or APIs are available for the LEGO BOOST?
Over the holidays I tried the following Python library:
https://github.com/undera/pylgbst but I couldn't get it to work.
Then again my knowledge of Python is very limited.
I'm more experienced with C++ or C#, is anything available for those languages?
As a general question, do you know of any programming environments or API's that can control the LEGO move hub and its peripherals from the LEGO BOOST set?

Boost and the other Powered Up components (the new City trains, the app-controlled batmobile, and WeDo 2.0) are controlled via Bluetooth. Any environment that can send bluetooth commands can be used to control these components.
There is a github page which documents some of the reverse-engineering that has been done and it links to several third-party Boost/PoweredUp programming libraries. I've used movehub, but there is another node.js library called node-poweredup which looks more complete.
Lego themselves have documented part of the BLE wireless protocol on github as well.

Not C but you might take a look at https://github.com/JorgePe/pyb00st

If you prefer C#, there a new lib on the block: SharpBrick.PoweredUp. While the Boost hub and motors are missing, the protocol is implemented. Your use case should be two minor contributions away.
Full Disclaimer: I maintain the library. I do not have Boost Hardware but the protocol officially supports Boost Hub. Just some enums and types are missing.

You can try our just released WeDo 2.0 Framework that should suppot Boost partially (full support will be added soon). It is open source and free for education (written in C#). You can find it by this link: https://github.com/btframework/WeDo


text:
Problem With Bionicle Joint Sockets Cracking, Repair Options?
I'm pretty sure that serious Bionicle fans have all dealt with cracking of the joint socket pieces. However, is super-gluing the broken parts a solution? I'm worried that the joint  socket won't be elastic enough for the joint piece to enter, or even that it might crack again.

Super-glue? Nope, no super-gluing if LEGO has anything to say about it.
This is probably a duplicate question, but if you contact LEGO directly, they will replace the part for free.  Follow this older post for details.

Thank you for the suggestion, but I think that it is very ulikely they will replace parts of the set that is now a decade old (I'm speaking of 8994). Unfortunately I do not have credit card nor paypal either (I'm 16 years old) and can't buy online using their pick-a-brick service. Again thank you a lot :)

The socket joints from around 2008-2010 were poorly designed. They were both too thin and too tight, so cracking was a very common problem.
Because the issue is the shape of the part, super glue doesn't do much. I tested it out on of my broken joints and the parts cracked again the first time I connected it. So don't bother with that.
What may help is sanding the inside of the socket's prongs down to make it less tight during insertion. I tested this out on a few of my sockets. Sanded sockets took 100 insertions without cracking while the ones that weren't broke after 20-30. However, I've also heard that the 2008 joints crack after sitting too long in a connected state, which sanding may not prevent.