Why are engineering sample CPUs illegal to sell?...

[Commander Kinsey]

On Mon, 03 Jan 2022 23:34:55 -0000, VanguardLH <V@nguard.lh> wrote:

Commander Kinsey <CK1@nospam.com> wrote:

On Mon, 03 Jan 2022 19:58:13 -0000, VanguardLH <V@nguard.lh> wrote:

Commander Kinsey <CK1@nospam.com> wrote:

On Mon, 03 Jan 2022 19:46:24 -0000, Paul <nospam@needed.invalid> wrote:

On 1/3/2022 12:21 PM, Commander Kinsey wrote:
Why are engineering sample CPUs illegal to sell?

https://www.intel.ca/content/www/ca/en/support/articles/000056190/processors.html

\"Can I get engineering sample processors from Intel?

Due to the pre-production nature of the engineering sample processors,
they are generally only loaned to OEMs, ODMs, and ISVs for pre-production
test and evaluation work under specific contractual terms and conditions
to assure the protection of assets and confidential information.

Engineering sample processors are not made available
to the general public by Intel.\"

In effect, you\'re in possession of stolen goods.

They\'re not stolen, since Intel don\'t take them back from who they \"lent\" them to.

The whole idea is, no matter what happens, those goods are
not to be circulating in the hands of the public. You could give
them back to the local rep, and he could have them shredded.
(Some factories shred their e-waste to prevent recovery by
waste removal people.)

Those samples could have defects, maybe they don\'t have
a 100,000 hour operating life (early mortality). They might not
even compute properly at full speed. Like an ES 3GHz processor,
there might be an errata sheet in the box, stating you\'re supposed
to run them at 2GHz.

Intel could also mark them with sufficient information, to
trace them back to who received them. To determine who is leaking
them and violating a contract term.

With other manufacturers, those parts are the equivalent of the
\"qual barrel\". And the stuff in the qual barrel, is definitely
not production quality.

Not allowing them to be sold, is to protect *you* from receiving
inferior goods.

They clearly say sample on them. If I bought one knowing it\'s a sample, why would I have a problem?

Someone could rent a car, and then sell it to you. The sale was illegal
by the seller, but YOU are in possesion of stolen property.

WHO sold you the engineering sample?

You\'ve stated those two things in another post, stop repeating yourself.

Still applicable.

No point as I\'ll see it in the other post.

> That was the best retort you could come up with?

It wasn\'t a retort, I was pointing out you\'re wasting time saying the same thing multiple times.

And you STILL haven\'t answered who sold you or is selling those samples.
Hmm, maybe you\'re the seller. Reminds of the scammers on eBay that
slice up a volume license to separate individual buyers.

Why would I want you to grass him off?

As for licenses, I\'ve bought about 50 Windows 7 premium licenses, with genuine stickers for £37 when the retail was £137. They work fine.

 

[Commander Kinsey]

On Mon, 03 Jan 2022 23:49:48 -0000, VanguardLH <V@nguard.lh> wrote:

NOTE: Continued excessive cross-posting thwarted. Number of
cross-posted newsgroups reduced from 4 to 2.

Commander Kinsey <CK1@nospam.com> wrote:

On Mon, 03 Jan 2022 19:55:47 -0000, VanguardLH <V@nguard.lh> wrote:

NOTE: OP shotgun multi-posted to more than 3 newsgroups. My reply was
submitted to only the relevant newsgroups. Following newsgroups were
omitted in my reply:

uk.legal

Readded, why is this not to do with legalities?

sci.electronics.basics

A CPU is electronic you utter nitwit.

Cross-posting to more than 3 newsgroups violates netiquette.

If it shouldn\'t be done, it\'s odd how every newsreader allows it.

I post to groups where I think people will give an answer or be interested.

Doesn\'t how many you contrive are on-topic. Some netizens consider more than 2
to be excessive.

Using the word netizen indicates you\'re a freak.

Commander Kinsey <CK1@nospam.com> wrote:
^^^^^^^^^^___ You don\'t own nor have permission to
use this registered & active domain.

They should have thought of that when they sold absolute shite.

How is that relevant to the domain you used in your address field?

I thought you were talking about spam.com, Hormel Food Corporation, that sells that disgusting waste product as food. I didn\'t realise you\'d be stupid enough to think nospam.com was a company.

I\'ll put whatever I want in there.

Yep, the excuse of a troll.

I\'m not going to put my own address in there and receive spam am I?

If anyone chooses to email it, they\'re the ones breaking the law.

Oh, that law. Uh huh.

Spam is illegal is it not? If not why not?

> Hmm, a nitwit that has no knowlege of the .invalid TLD.

I do, but see no point in using it.

Else, YOU are
the spammer energizing spam and other unsolicited messages to a domain
that isn\'t yours. Yep, trolls aren\'t known for being polite.

It isn\'t anyone\'s, and I\'m not the one sending the spam.

Why are engineering sample CPUs illegal to sell?

https://www.intel.com/content/www/us/en/support/articles/000056190/processors.html

They are pre-production processors Intel loans to original equipment
manufacturers (OEMs), original device manufacturers (ODMs), and
independent software vendors (ISVs) to be used in the product design
cycle before product launch.
and

- Produced by Intel are the sole property of Intel.
- Produced by Intel are Intel Confidential.
- Are provided by Intel under nondisclosure and/or special loan
agreement terms with restrictions on the recipient\'s handling and
use.
- Are not for sale or resale.
- May not have passed commercial regulatory requirements.
Are not covered under Intel warranty and are generally not supported
by Intel

You can rent a car. You can test drive a demo. It\'s NOT your car.

Intel don\'t ask for it back like the car rental place does. It\'s
given not loaned.

Wrong. Loans don\'t always require [re]payment. That\'s just what you
are used to. Because of her financial situation, I know someone that
got a loan with zero interest, zero payments, and no lien on change of
title of the home, so no payback. Granting use does not mandate payment
nor return.

That\'s not a loan if it doesn\'t have to be paid back, that was a gift.

Oh, did YOU happen to get all the paperwork allowing you to possess the
engineering sample to definitely know the samples were not to be
returned?

Doesn\'t matter to me. I\'ve paid the money and I have the product, any theft that took place previously is not of my concern.

My guess, and yours, is return was not required, especially
since the samples could be damaged on use. You think someone who loans
you a stick of gum really wants it back?

People do not loan sticks of gum. They give them.

So, just how did YOU acquire an engineering sample? You\'d already
know the answer if you had filled out all the paperwork. Or, WHO is
selling what they claim is an engineering sample?

Why would I grass off someone who supplied me with a nice cheap CPU?

So, why are you whining about others stating you are in possession of
stolen goods,

I\'m not, I\'m whining about it being difficult for sellers to advertise them.

> because obviously you don\'t care about aiding thieves.

They stole it, not me.

> To you, if you don\'t get caught, it ain\'t illegal.

Of course it isn\'t. When I break the speed limit and don\'t get caught, I receive no fine, so the law has had no effect on me.

 

[Phil Allison]

Commander Kinsey Raving Lunatic wrote:
====================

** Not at all - if problems were small or fixable the amps would have been used in the same company\'s hire business.
Needed to look right for that job.
No need to have the same model number.

** To assist sales of the new model - it was needed.

So he lied.

** No. He deceived a gullible fool and sold items that wound up hurting the company he worked for.

That is a lie,

** He was simply being \" economical with the facts\" some of which he did not know.

But my question was about selling them as engineering samples.

** The situations are parallel.

In both cases the items were not meant for sale for good reasons.
And assholes like YOU wanted to circumvent that decision for their own benefit.

No,

** Yes - you fucking LIAR

 

[Brian Gaff (Sofa)]

I\'ve only seen this one post, but I know pre production models of things
can slip out for whatever reason. I had a computer once where the pcb had
been manufactured with a fault, tend you can clearly see back then where the
tracks had been manually cut and wires bridged the contacts to the right
places, leaving the tracks as orphans.
Likewise a number of Sinclair ZX Spectrums in the early days were made with
known faulty ULA chips and a logic chip glued to the surface with its legs
splayed and wired to make the circuit work.
The first batch of Phillips CD100s the very first CD player on the market
had quite a lot of wires cut tracks and components wired in odd ways inside
it. I have to say that none of these what we might call bodges ever caused
any trouble during the lives of the products. The CD100 is in fact still
working, although its tendency to jump if a gnat walks across the floor
shows it does not have the memory buffers in modern players.
Brian

--

This newsgroup posting comes to you directly from...
The Sofa of Brian Gaff...
briang1@blueyonder.co.uk
Blind user, so no pictures please
Note this Signature is meaningless.!
\"Commander Kinsey\" <CK1@nospam.com> wrote in message
newsp.1ff0vywmmvhs6z@ryzen.lan...

On Mon, 03 Jan 2022 22:44:24 -0000, Phil Allison <pallison49@gmail.com
wrote:

Commander Kinsey Raving Lunatic wrote:
====================

** True story:

A manufacturer here in Sydney ( Jands Electronics) made a
\"pre-production\" batch of a new model power amplifier for professional
use.
They wisely chose to road test it in the expected environment - on the
road with live bands.
They proved to be problematic in several respects and the design was
heavily revised for the production version.
The sample amps were fully labelled with the maker\'s logo and the same
model number as the later versions.

Well that was pretty stupid of them.

** Not at all - if problems were small or fixable the amps would have
been used in the same company\'s hire business.
Needed to look right for that job.

No need to have the same model number.

Think there were about 20 of them, put into storage for eventual
disposal.

Then an enterprising staff member obtained them and decided he could
sell them all to a local second hand dealer
- letting him believe they were just like the regular models on sale at
the time - but for a very low price so giving him a large mark up.

So he lied.

** No. He deceived a gullible fool and sold items that wound up hurting
the company he worked for.

That is a lie, he did not say they were tests.

But my question was about selling them as engineering samples.

** The situations are parallel.

In both cases the items were not meant for sale for good reasons.
And assholes like YOU wanted to circumvent that decision for their own
benefit.

No, if I buy an engineering sample advertised as such, I don\'t expect it
to work perfectly.

Newsgroups reinstated.

 

[Phil Allison]

Brian Gaff Shithead Trollpuked:
=============================

I\'ve only seen this one post, but I know pre production models of things
can slip out for whatever reason.

** No you don\'t.

I had a computer once where the pcb had
been manufactured with a fault, tend you can clearly see back then where the
tracks had been manually cut and wires bridged the contacts to the right
places, leaving the tracks as orphans.

** So fucking what ? That is not an example..

Likewise a number of Sinclair ZX Spectrums in the early days were made with
known faulty ULA chips and a logic chip glued to the surface with its legs
splayed and wired to make the circuit work.

** Still very much meant to be sold - so not a failed prototype.

The first batch of Phillips CD100s the very first CD player on the market
had quite a lot of wires cut tracks and components wired in odd ways inside
it. I have to say that none of these what we might call bodges ever caused
any trouble during the lives of the products.

** Just destroyed your own bullshit case.




........ Phil

 

[Peeler]

On Tue, 4 Jan 2022 08:13:45 -0000, Brainless & Daft, the notorious,
troll-feeding senile idiot, blathered again:

> I\'ve only seen this one post,

And one post is enough for you to instantly start feeding the trolling
attention whore again, you filthy disgusting troll-feeding blind cretin!

 

[rbowman]

On 01/04/2022 01:13 AM, Brian Gaff (Sofa) wrote:

Likewise a number of Sinclair ZX Spectrums in the early days were made with
known faulty ULA chips and a logic chip glued to the surface with its legs
splayed and wired to make the circuit work.

When the ZX80 came out it was available as an unassembled kit for $99. I
don\'t remember the exact problem but I had to tweak it ti get it to run.

Osborne came out with a 100 column conversion for the Osborne 1. CMOS
was a new technology and while it normally saved power, dissipation
increased with frequency. The circuit would work until the chip got hot.
I replace it with the equivalent LS part and all was good.

Back in those days I could see the components without a microscope so
component level troubleshooting was feasible.

 

[Harry Bloomfield Esq]

rbowman wrote :

Osborne came out with a 100 column conversion for the Osborne 1. CMOS was a
new technology and while it normally saved power, dissipation increased with
frequency. The circuit would work until the chip got hot. I replace it with
the equivalent LS part and all was good.

The BBC computer had a similar problem - the early versions had to have
an heatsink on a certain chip to keep it cool, I half remember. I also
had a timing issue with an S100 computer I built and partially
designed. I finally spotted the issue, when I could afford to buy a
\'scope, but by then it was too late - my homebuilt was due for
replacement with something better.

I think now that designer have simply become more skilled and obviously
the range of components have improved massively.

 

[Peeler]

On Tue, 4 Jan 2022 07:53:26 -0700, lowbrowwoman, the endlessly driveling,
troll-feeding, senile idiot, blabbered again:

Back in those days I could see the components without a microscope so
component level troubleshooting was feasible.

I bet that even back in those days you were an endlessly driveling bigmouth
and braggart! <BG>

 

[Sysadmin]

On Tue, 04 Jan 2022 15:42:08 +0000, Harry Bloomfield Esq wrote:

rbowman wrote :
Osborne came out with a 100 column conversion for the Osborne 1. CMOS
was a new technology and while it normally saved power, dissipation
increased with frequency. The circuit would work until the chip got
hot. I replace it with the equivalent LS part and all was good.

The BBC computer had a similar problem - the early versions had to have
an heatsink on a certain chip to keep it cool, I half remember. I also
had a timing issue with an S100 computer I built and partially designed.
I finally spotted the issue, when I could afford to buy a \'scope, but by
then it was too late - my homebuilt was due for replacement with
something better.

I think now that designer have simply become more skilled and obviously
the range of components have improved massively.

They use logic analysers in simulations now before the design gets
anywhere near a product.

 

[Commander Kinsey]

On Tue, 04 Jan 2022 00:15:37 -0000, Phil Allison <pallison49@gmail.com> wrote:

Commander Kinsey Raving Lunatic wrote:
====================


** Not at all - if problems were small or fixable the amps would have been used in the same company\'s hire business.
Needed to look right for that job.
No need to have the same model number.

** To assist sales of the new model - it was needed.

Add a T on the end for \"test\".

So he lied.

** No. He deceived a gullible fool and sold items that wound up hurting the company he worked for.

That is a lie,

** He was simply being \" economical with the facts\" some of which he did not know.

Pretty sure he knew they were test models.

But my question was about selling them as engineering samples.

** The situations are parallel.

In both cases the items were not meant for sale for good reasons.
And assholes like YOU wanted to circumvent that decision for their own benefit.

No,

** Yes - you fucking LIAR

Again, \"my question was about selling them as engineering samples\", meaning the buyer knows full well what they are getting into. If I sell you a 2nd hand car, do you expect it to be as reliable as a new one?

 

[Commander Kinsey]

On Tue, 04 Jan 2022 08:45:15 -0000, Phil Allison <pallison49@gmail.com> wrote:

Brian Gaff Shithead Trollpuked:
=============================

I\'ve only seen this one post, but I know pre production models of things
can slip out for whatever reason.

** No you don\'t.

I had a computer once where the pcb had
been manufactured with a fault, tend you can clearly see back then where the
tracks had been manually cut and wires bridged the contacts to the right
places, leaving the tracks as orphans.

** So fucking what ? That is not an example..


Likewise a number of Sinclair ZX Spectrums in the early days were made with
known faulty ULA chips and a logic chip glued to the surface with its legs
splayed and wired to make the circuit work.

** Still very much meant to be sold - so not a failed prototype.

The first batch of Phillips CD100s the very first CD player on the market
had quite a lot of wires cut tracks and components wired in odd ways inside
it. I have to say that none of these what we might call bodges ever caused
any trouble during the lives of the products.

** Just destroyed your own bullshit case.

Do grow up.

And if you\'re going to insult someone, you need to post it to the group he reads it in.

 

[Commander Kinsey]

The ZX Spectrum had faulty RAM chips, Sinclair bought dodgy ones of twice the size they needed, tested where the fault was, and only use the good half. It saved a lot on the price.

On Tue, 04 Jan 2022 08:13:45 -0000, Brian Gaff (Sofa) <briang1@blueyonder.co.uk> wrote:

I\'ve only seen this one post, but I know pre production models of things
can slip out for whatever reason. I had a computer once where the pcb had
been manufactured with a fault, tend you can clearly see back then where the
tracks had been manually cut and wires bridged the contacts to the right
places, leaving the tracks as orphans.
Likewise a number of Sinclair ZX Spectrums in the early days were made with
known faulty ULA chips and a logic chip glued to the surface with its legs
splayed and wired to make the circuit work.
The first batch of Phillips CD100s the very first CD player on the market
had quite a lot of wires cut tracks and components wired in odd ways inside
it. I have to say that none of these what we might call bodges ever caused
any trouble during the lives of the products. The CD100 is in fact still
working, although its tendency to jump if a gnat walks across the floor
shows it does not have the memory buffers in modern players.
Brian

 

[Commander Kinsey]

On Tue, 04 Jan 2022 14:53:26 -0000, rbowman <bowman@montana.com> wrote:

On 01/04/2022 01:13 AM, Brian Gaff (Sofa) wrote:
Likewise a number of Sinclair ZX Spectrums in the early days were made with
known faulty ULA chips and a logic chip glued to the surface with its legs
splayed and wired to make the circuit work.

When the ZX80 came out it was available as an unassembled kit for $99. I
don\'t remember the exact problem but I had to tweak it ti get it to run.

Osborne came out with a 100 column conversion for the Osborne 1. CMOS
was a new technology and while it normally saved power, dissipation
increased with frequency. The circuit would work until the chip got hot.
I replace it with the equivalent LS part and all was good.

Back in those days I could see the components without a microscope so
component level troubleshooting was feasible.

I once broke a Pentium 2 or 3 (or that sort of era) by pushing hard with a screwdriver on the heatsink mount. It slipped and scratched the top of it (the tracks from the actual processor across to the pins). The technician where I worked had such a steady hand he resoldered it under a microscope.

 

[Commander Kinsey]

On Tue, 04 Jan 2022 18:00:02 -0000, trader_4 <trader4@optonline.net> wrote:

On Tuesday, January 4, 2022 at 11:48:23 AM UTC-5, Clare Snyder wrote:
On Tue, 4 Jan 2022 16:01:22 -0000 (UTC), Sysadmin <j...@home.net
wrote:
On Tue, 04 Jan 2022 15:42:08 +0000, Harry Bloomfield Esq wrote:

rbowman wrote :
Osborne came out with a 100 column conversion for the Osborne 1. CMOS
was a new technology and while it normally saved power, dissipation
increased with frequency. The circuit would work until the chip got
hot. I replace it with the equivalent LS part and all was good.

The BBC computer had a similar problem - the early versions had to have
an heatsink on a certain chip to keep it cool, I half remember. I also
had a timing issue with an S100 computer I built and partially designed.
I finally spotted the issue, when I could afford to buy a \'scope, but by
then it was too late - my homebuilt was due for replacement with
something better.

I think now that designer have simply become more skilled and obviously
the range of components have improved massively.

They use logic analysers in simulations now before the design gets
anywhere near a product.
Remember all those \"sx\" processors? DX Processores where the
floating point processors built on the fie were defective, and rather
than discard everything they just blew a few \"fuses\" on the chip and
sold them as SX on boards where an external FPU could be mounted if
you needed the FPU function

That\'s another myth. At introduction, the SX\'s used the same silicone
as the DX product, with the floating point unit untested and disabled.
If Intel were to have relied on die where the floating point unit was
defective, there wouldn\'t have been enough to meet the enormous demand
for SX product. This was high yield production at Intel not Joe\'s
crap line. And within a year Intel had a new SX version with the floating point
unit removed, which made the die smaller, less costly to produce
and more profitable. That was the plan all along.

You could buy an SX and reenable the coprocessor.

 

[Commander Kinsey]

On Tue, 04 Jan 2022 17:05:30 -0000, Andrew <Andrew97d-junk@mybtinternet.com> wrote:

On 04/01/2022 16:08, charles wrote:
In article <sr1psh$2l2$1@dont-email.me>, Harry Bloomfield Esq
a@harrym1byt.plus.com> wrote:
rbowman wrote :
Osborne came out with a 100 column conversion for the Osborne 1. CMOS
was a new technology and while it normally saved power, dissipation
increased with frequency. The circuit would work until the chip got
hot. I replace it with the equivalent LS part and all was good.

The BBC computer had a similar problem - the early versions had to have
an heatsink on a certain chip to keep it cool, I half remember.

I had one of the very early ones and don\'t remember any such problem.


They were supplied initially with a non-switching P/S that ran rather
hot, but a better switch-mode power supply (astec?) was supplied
free-of-charge a few months later.

The ones I encountered were very heavy, so I assume not switching. I don\'t remember excessive heat. It\'s not like we used to run the CPUs flat out back then.

 

[Commander Kinsey]

On Tue, 04 Jan 2022 13:50:02 -0000, Bill <nonegiven@att.net> wrote:

On 1/4/2022 4:19 AM, R.Wieser wrote:
Kinsey,

They clearly say sample on them. If I bought one knowing it\'s a sample,
why would I have a problem?

Still playing stupid I see ...

Because you should be aware by now (if you wheren\'t already) that those
engineering sample CPU are not theirs to sell. When you than decide to buy
them anyway you would be *knowingly* be part of a theft.

And that \'knowingly\' part is something the Law does not take lightly. If
they would ever find out you would be forced to return the goods to the
actual owner - without getting your money back - and likely be \"invited\" to
spend some quality time in one of the Laws \"relaxation centers\".

The positive side of that that the boarding, meals and doctor visits are
free.

Regards,
Rudy Wieser

This reminds me of something similar. There are many \"entities\" selling
Windows-Pro (OEM) keys for under $20, while a \"proper\" one will set you
back $160. It surprises me that this is allowed to go on and is being
treated \"so lightly\". I will almost surely be the sucker who pays $160,
but the difference is enough to make one stop and think about it. I
wonder why they don\'t ask for $260 or $360? I only paid $99 for my OEM
copy of Windows-7 (pro), but at least I got Windows-10 as a free update
to it. I would like to upgrade, but will wait until it is easier to buy
a sensible GPU at a sensible price.

What do you mean by entities? It\'s perfectly legal to buy OEM anything, including Windows. You can get them from a major seller in the UK. You just miss out on the big manual and some support or something.

 

[Mr Pounder Esquire]

Commander Kinsey wrote:

On Mon, 03 Jan 2022 22:44:24 -0000, Phil Allison
pallison49@gmail.com> wrote:
Commander Kinsey Raving Lunatic wrote:
====================

** True story:

A manufacturer here in Sydney ( Jands Electronics) made a
\"pre-production\" batch of a new model power amplifier for
professional use. They wisely chose to road test it in the
expected environment - on the road with live bands. They proved to be
problematic in several respects and the design
was heavily revised for the production version. The sample amps were
fully labelled with the maker\'s logo and the
same model number as the later versions.

Well that was pretty stupid of them.

** Not at all - if problems were small or fixable the amps would
have been used in the same company\'s hire business. Needed to
look right for that job.

No need to have the same model number.

Think there were about 20 of them, put into storage for eventual
disposal. Then an enterprising staff member obtained them and decided
he
could sell them all to a local second hand dealer
- letting him believe they were just like the regular models on
sale at the time - but for a very low price so giving him a large
mark up. So he lied.

** No. He deceived a gullible fool and sold items that wound up
hurting the company he worked for.

That is a lie, he did not say they were tests.

But my question was about selling them as engineering samples.

** The situations are parallel.

In both cases the items were not meant for sale for good reasons.
And assholes like YOU wanted to circumvent that decision for their
own benefit.

No, if I buy an engineering sample advertised as such, I don\'t expect
it to work perfectly.
Newsgroups reinstated.

Hucker is a well known troll. Best not to feed the twat.

 

[Phil Allison]

Commander Kinsey Raving Lunatic wrote:
====================

But my question was about selling them as engineering samples.

** The situations are parallel.

In both cases the items were not meant for sale for good reasons.
And assholes like YOU wanted to circumvent that decision for their own benefit.

No,

** Yes - you fucking LIAR

Again, \"my question was about selling them as engineering samples\",

** With a caveat they were not for sale as they may contain defects.
Exactly like the 20 amps I cited.

FOAD you pig headed troll.

 

[Chris]

Commander Kinsey <CK1@nospam.com> wrote:

On Mon, 03 Jan 2022 23:49:48 -0000, VanguardLH <V@nguard.lh> wrote:

NOTE: Continued excessive cross-posting thwarted. Number of
cross-posted newsgroups reduced from 4 to 2.

Commander Kinsey <CK1@nospam.com> wrote:

On Mon, 03 Jan 2022 19:55:47 -0000, VanguardLH <V@nguard.lh> wrote:

NOTE: OP shotgun multi-posted to more than 3 newsgroups. My reply was
submitted to only the relevant newsgroups. Following newsgroups were
omitted in my reply:

uk.legal

Readded, why is this not to do with legalities?

sci.electronics.basics

A CPU is electronic you utter nitwit.

Cross-posting to more than 3 newsgroups violates netiquette.

If it shouldn\'t be done, it\'s odd how every newsreader allows it.

I post to groups where I think people will give an answer or be interested.

Doesn\'t how many you contrive are on-topic. Some netizens consider more than 2
to be excessive.

Using the word netizen indicates you\'re a freak.

Commander Kinsey <CK1@nospam.com> wrote:
^^^^^^^^^^___ You don\'t own nor have permission to
use this registered & active domain.

They should have thought of that when they sold absolute shite.

How is that relevant to the domain you used in your address field?

I thought you were talking about spam.com, Hormel Food Corporation, that
sells that disgusting waste product as food. I didn\'t realise you\'d be
stupid enough to think nospam.com was a company.

I\'ll put whatever I want in there.

Yep, the excuse of a troll.

I\'m not going to put my own address in there and receive spam am I?

If anyone chooses to email it, they\'re the ones breaking the law.

Oh, that law. Uh huh.

Spam is illegal is it not? If not why not?

Hmm, a nitwit that has no knowlege of the .invalid TLD.

I do, but see no point in using it.

Else, YOU are
the spammer energizing spam and other unsolicited messages to a domain
that isn\'t yours. Yep, trolls aren\'t known for being polite.

It isn\'t anyone\'s, and I\'m not the one sending the spam.

Why are engineering sample CPUs illegal to sell?

https://www.intel.com/content/www/us/en/support/articles/000056190/processors.html

They are pre-production processors Intel loans to original equipment
manufacturers (OEMs), original device manufacturers (ODMs), and
independent software vendors (ISVs) to be used in the product design
cycle before product launch.
and

- Produced by Intel are the sole property of Intel.
- Produced by Intel are Intel Confidential.
- Are provided by Intel under nondisclosure and/or special loan
agreement terms with restrictions on the recipient\'s handling and
use.
- Are not for sale or resale.
- May not have passed commercial regulatory requirements.
Are not covered under Intel warranty and are generally not supported
by Intel

You can rent a car. You can test drive a demo. It\'s NOT your car.

Intel don\'t ask for it back like the car rental place does. It\'s
given not loaned.

Try reading the text above more slowly this time. It is explicitly loaned.

Oh, did YOU happen to get all the paperwork allowing you to possess the
engineering sample to definitely know the samples were not to be
returned?

Doesn\'t matter to me. I\'ve paid the money and I have the product, any
theft that took place previously is not of my concern.

Your poor knowledge of basic UK law is concerning.
https://www.sentencingcouncil.org.uk/offences/magistrates-court/item/handling-stolen-goods-2/

Knowingly handling stolen goods is illegal.

Not knowing they\'re stolen doesn\'t mean you get to keep them. They will
rightfully be confiscated from you.