this post was submitted on 28 Sep 2024
17 points (94.7% liked)
Hardware
663 readers
146 users here now
All things related to technology hardware, with a focus on computing hardware.
Rules (Click to Expand):
-
Follow the Lemmy.world Rules - https://mastodon.world/about
-
Be kind. No bullying, harassment, racism, sexism etc. against other users.
-
No Spam, illegal content, or NSFW content.
-
Please stay on topic, adjacent topics (e.g. software) are fine if they are strongly relevant to technology hardware. Another example would be business news for hardware-focused companies.
-
Please try and post original sources when possible (as opposed to summaries).
-
If posting an archived version of the article, please include a URL link to the original article in the body of the post.
Some other hardware communities across Lemmy:
- Augmented Reality - !augmented_reality@lemmy.world
- Gaming Laptops - !gaminglaptops@lemmy.world
- Laptops - !laptops@lemmy.world
- Linux Hardware - !linuxhardware@programming.dev
- Mechanical Keyboards - !mechanicalkeyboards@kbin.social
- Microcontrollers - !microcontrollers@lemux.minnix.dev
- Monitors - !monitors@lemm.ee
- Raspberry Pi - !raspberry_pi@programming.dev
- Retro Computing - !retrocomputing@lemmy.sdf.org
- Single Board Computers - !sbcs@lemux.minnix.dev
- Virtual Reality - !virtualreality@lemmy.world
Icon by "icon lauk" under CC BY 3.0
founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
You are wrong.
Intel didn't design them to do that. Design implies intent.
They fucked up, yes. Not providing replacement/refund for damaged chips is horrendous. It will probably end in a settled class action lawsuit where everyone affected get $5, which isn't a good outcome.
But they didn't design them to do this.