I worked at Mouser as a developer for a few years, the real reason is because our parts are used by terrorists, etc. to build weapons that kill people/bombs.
We created a service that blocks people from buying various parts using a ton of different complex business rules (one simple rule we had was we straight up didn't sell ANYTHING to the middle east for a while).
Startups were another business we didn't sell to simply because of the sheer amount of fake companies we got trying to work around our rules engine.
Alot of the rules for our service was mandated from the FBI. That was a fun call to reveive from them.
"The people who build weapon systems have countries backing them and they have ways to source any thing."
I think this is a bit short sited. Many parties are interested in building weapons that cause lots of harm. And not everyone who is interested in making weapons has countries backing them, in fact they likely have countries against them building said weapons. Hence the needed work around to try and source parts from Mouser.
I worked at Mouser as an engineer for a few years. This included work on the service that charges this blanket tariff rate, which includes incredibly complex business logic that ended up taking half the year to make. and that was with upper management pushing us very hard to get it done. Digi key from what i understood is a smaller company that lacks the ability the capacity to get something like this done as fast. or at least thats my best guess. Mouser knew the obstacles digi key dealt with when it came to things like capacity, storage, and developer power. I remember the discussions about how we could "beat" them out in sales revenue and why we were more "bulletproof" in the way we did business.
If Digikey consistently charged 10% more than Mouser, yeah that would absolutely ruin them. Digikey and Mouser don't have much to distinguish them already. It's like Aldi vs Lidl.
I find it a bit silly at points as well. Obviously 'AWS' is not synonymous with all 'cloud' technology, but whenever someone references AWS instances I understand they're referencing something not on prem at its core. Which gets the point across.
Many dealers and addicts who are involved in extremely violent crimes are plead down to drug crimes after having been charged with both drug and violent crimes.
>"On December 24, 2016, three Manchester police officers responded to an apartment following a report of a domestic dispute. The report was made by the mother of Ashley Arbogast, who advised that her daughter had called her Stating that her boyfriend had broken her arm during an argument."
He is being punished for what he was convicted of; whether you agree with the penalty or not. If we do change the penalties, the convictions will change too.
I just wanted to point out that there is clear evidence that this individual was involved in at least one violent act, as is often the case with ‘non-violent drug convicts’.
Any yet there are coke-cola machines everywhere including inside police stations which kills more people each year.
And only one company is allowed to import the specific leaves/material (coca leafs). The government restricts everyone from importing them unless it's one of the biggest companies in the world.
He didn't kill anyone, unless he misrepresented the product and the customer used the product incorrectly and died as a result. Even then there's argument for tainted product and considering the persecution around the industry, I as a juror would acquit any charge reliant on that as the underlying logic. Even then, if I foresaw more than 12 years sentence for anyone I would acquit and jury nullify on human rights grounds. Humans must be free. The big moral failure of modern states is their lack of unmolested opt-out.
People like big strong dominating government until it gets replaced with the Mormon church, or a Caliphate, then nooo it's not statesmanship but just religion. (Hint: all states are religions, and codes are religious texts. What do freedom of religion and freedom of association mean in this context, instead of the toothless safe-for-government one you're used to thinking of it in?)
The whole response reads like a cheesed up, swaggered out, smug essay. It's so clearly trying to illicit strong emotional response. I read this years ago as a teen and ate it up. Wiser more adult me knows how garbage and fake the entire response is. Reddit is known for this.
We created a service that blocks people from buying various parts using a ton of different complex business rules (one simple rule we had was we straight up didn't sell ANYTHING to the middle east for a while).
Startups were another business we didn't sell to simply because of the sheer amount of fake companies we got trying to work around our rules engine.
Alot of the rules for our service was mandated from the FBI. That was a fun call to reveive from them.
reply