Combo Pocket is a Ukrainian product. This page is about one simple decision: we do not work with the Russian Federation.
The decision is made, it is irreversible, and below is its full logic. I believe any position should be derivable from first principles, not borrowed from someone else's opinions. Let's derive it.
Did Russia have the right to attack Ukraine? Let's break it down into basic elements. International law forbids it. The UN Charter forbids it. Its own signed guarantees forbid it. Elementary ethics forbids it.
We went through the entire space of possible justifications, and there is not a single point in it where the attack would be lawful. The probability of finding a justification equals zero — not "near zero", but exactly zero. This is a rare case where the answer is that clean.
Who needed this war? Run any model, with any weights. Ukraine? Obviously not. Europe, the world? No. The citizens of Russia themselves? Also no — they got isolation, losses, and a future worse than before.
War is a system with negative efficiency: at the input it consumes lives, energy, metal, and time — the most valuable resources of civilization — and at the output it produces nothing. Not a single product. Not a single solved problem.
From an engineering standpoint it is the worst possible project: it is not merely useless, it destroys the useful work of other systems. If there were a ranking of projects by the ratio of "cost / value created", this war would take last place by a wide margin.
We are told: "someone in Ukraine was being oppressed." Let's check the dataset. Oppression by language? Not recorded — people freely spoke whichever they wanted. By nationality? No. By faith? No. By any other trait? No.
Ukraine is an open system with a low barrier to entry: want to work — work, want to build a company — build, want to grow — grow, the market and society do not stand in your way. This is a falsifiable claim, and no one has falsified it — because there is nothing to falsify it with.
When people have freedom and opportunity, they do not need to be "liberated." An operation to "liberate" those who did not ask for it is, in honest terminology, called something else — an invasion. Substituting terms does not change the physics of what is happening: missiles arriving at residential buildings do not become "defense" just because they were named so.
This is the other side's main argument, so let's examine it especially carefully — and from first principles. Russia has the largest nuclear arsenal on the planet. Nuclear deterrence is the ultimate security instrument that exists; there is nothing greater in the current technological civilization. Mutually assured destruction is not a metaphor, it is a working mechanism that kept superpowers from direct wars for seventy years.
And here is a country possessing this ultimate instrument, claiming it was threatened by a neighbor — without nuclear weapons, without an invading army, without any intent to attack. The equation does not add up.
And it fails not at the level of calculation, but at the level of the input data: a threat you generated for yourself with your own propaganda is not an input signal from reality, it is a hallucination of a model trained on its own fabrications. A classic error: garbage in — garbage out, except here the output is not a bad forecast, but destroyed cities.
If maximum deterrence is not enough to feel safe, the problem is not external. The problem is in the architecture of the system itself, and such problems are fixed from within: you build an economy, raise engineers, retain talent instead of squeezing it out of the country, learn to speak with the civilized world in the language of trade and cooperation.
The incompetence of one's own leadership is a bug that must be fixed at home. It does not grant the right to destroy a neighboring country. The inability to create does not convert into the right to destroy — at no exchange rate.
Look at this from the height of civilization. Humanity faces real tasks: sustainable energy, space exploration, life extension, artificial intelligence. Tasks that demand every mind and every resource we have.
And against this backdrop one state spends its only future on dragging its neighbors into the past. Civilization should move toward the stars — not drive neighboring countries into the stone age.
Every missile fired at a Ukrainian city is a resource stolen from the future. This is not merely a crime against Ukraine. It is a crime against progress itself.
If you are reading this page, here is the main recommendation I can give as an engineer: look for the bug inside the system, not in its surroundings. This is a fundamental rule of debugging.
When a program crashes, a weak developer blames the operating system, the compiler, the hardware, the phase of the moon — anyone but their own code. A strong developer opens their own code first, because the statistics are merciless: in ninety-nine cases out of a hundred, the bug is there.
Your system has been telling you for decades that the source of all its failures is external: NATO, the West, the neighbors, a world conspiracy. Stop and apply common sense.
A country with the largest territory on the planet, colossal resources, a strong scientific school, and talented people — with a sound architecture, such a system should be one of the leaders of civilization. If instead it produces poverty, isolation, and wars for decades — the bug is not in the surroundings. The surroundings are actually fine: neighboring countries, including Ukraine, built open economies and grew with far fewer resources.
The bug is in the system itself: in a structure of power that does not change; in feedback that has been muted; in propaganda that substitutes your input data; in priorities where missiles matter more than hospitals. None of these problems is solved by seizing someone else's territory — for the same reason a crashing program cannot be fixed by formatting the neighbor's disk.
What does an engineer do with such a system? He does not pretend everything works. He honestly acknowledges the bug, localizes it, and fixes it — step by step, from within.
Demand honest data instead of propaganda. Demand working feedback — a government that can be replaced. Build, do not destroy. It is a long and hard road, but it is the only one that leads to a working system. And it begins with the hardest commit — with the admission: "the bug is ours."
We have gone through the entire chain of reasoning, and it converges on a single point:
Combo Pocket products and services are not sold in the territory of the Russian Federation.
Contracts with companies from the Russian Federation and with companies controlled by its residents are not concluded.
The size of an offer is not an argument: a price exists only for something that is a commodity, and this decision is not a commodity. The probability of its reconsideration is zero.