[HN Gopher] Tin Can - The landline, reinvented for kids
       ___________________________________________________________________
        
       Tin Can - The landline, reinvented for kids
        
       Author : derwiki
       Score  : 85 points
       Date   : 2025-07-16 21:33 UTC (1 hours ago)
        
 (HTM) web link (tincan.kids)
 (TXT) w3m dump (tincan.kids)
        
       | clutch89 wrote:
       | Love everything about this!
        
         | actionfromafar wrote:
         | Incredible
        
       | floren wrote:
       | Highly, highly, highly recommend you enable 911 calls by default
       | on all plans -- let parents disable it if they want. Cell phones
       | do this, even without a SIM card. Don't gate safety for $9.99/mo.
       | 
       | Edit: "The FCC requires that providers of interconnected VoIP
       | telephone services using the Public Switched Telephone Network
       | (PSTN) meet Enhanced 911 (E911) obligations."
       | https://www.fcc.gov/consumers/guides/voip-and-911-service
       | 
       | Also "911 Services: Providers of "interconnected" VoIP services -
       | which allow users generally to make calls to and receive calls
       | from the regular telephone network - do have 911 service
       | obligations" https://www.fcc.gov/consumers/guides/voice-over-
       | internet-pro...
        
         | ars wrote:
         | Is it possible to call 911 from a phone that doesn't have an
         | incoming phone number assigned?
        
           | turnsout wrote:
           | Yes, because you can pull the SIM card out of a cellphone and
           | dial 911.
        
             | tiagod wrote:
             | As far as I know, you can even call 911 with a SIM card on
             | but no service to your network. It will just use another
             | network.
        
           | lucaslazarus wrote:
           | Yes, because cell phones can do it even without a SIM card
        
         | davideg wrote:
         | This is a really good point, though E911 probably costs the
         | provider something. I wonder if they could offer 911 support at
         | actual cost ($1-2/month).
        
           | eterm wrote:
           | > probably costs the provider something
           | 
           | Yes, So what? Eat the cost.
           | 
           | Any life saved was worth it.
        
             | winstonewert wrote:
             | Then I'm sure you're willing to donate the cash to make it
             | happen.
        
               | __float wrote:
               | This _should_ be such an infrequent occurrence that the
               | cost should be negligible. Surely their $10 /month plan
               | has enough margin that this can be covered?
        
               | wizzwizz4 wrote:
               | Donate my time and services? Sure.
               | 
               | Donate the cash? To a _business_? ... So, you mean,
               | paying someone else 's profit margin, while they hold
               | lives hostage? Immanuel Kant says you don't negotiate
               | with terrorists.
        
         | neilv wrote:
         | Yeah, that jumped out at me. If you're doing something that
         | looks like a phone, _just do 911, always, even if you 're
         | losing money by doing that_.
        
         | turnsout wrote:
         | It's not arbitrary--if you look at your cellphone bill, there's
         | a tax for 911 access. They could probably offer a cheaper plan
         | with just 911, but they can't make it free. But I think $9.99
         | is fair all things considered.
         | 
         | I'm not sure I see the safety issue. My 7 year-old currently
         | doesn't have the ability to dial 911 without an adult's
         | cellphone. If I give them a Tin Can that has no 911, they are
         | no more or less safe than they were before.
        
           | ars wrote:
           | > they are no more or less safe than they were before.
           | 
           | I disagree. They _think_ they can call 911 from it, so in an
           | emergency they will try that, and fail, and try again
           | (because things fail all the time in today 's world), wasting
           | a ton of time.
           | 
           | Without this device they would try some other plan, maybe go
           | outside and scream for a passerby to help.
        
         | J_McQuade wrote:
         | I kinda get why they think they don't want to enable this, but
         | when I was a kid I once called 999 (in the UK) as a joke and
         | let me tell you it was only once. My friends and I were there
         | in the room watching films that we shouldn't and the uniformed
         | and kitted-out Constables turned up and gave us an incredibly
         | stern dressing-down about 30 minutes later.
         | 
         | Luckily, I am in the UK where a bunch of 12 year olds who've
         | just watched Scream calling the police about shadows doesn't
         | result in something getting shot, but still - I think I learned
         | something about actions and consequences that day.
        
           | dylan604 wrote:
           | Way back when, my toddler loved to play with the cordless
           | phone, and just happened to be able to dial 911. a lot. We'd
           | realize a connection was made but not who was on the other
           | end and just hang up. Eventually, 911 called back inquiring
           | why so many hang ups and if someone needed help. I was
           | surprised they took our explanation without dispatching
           | someone to follow up. Maybe that's different now as I know my
           | city has a policy of all calls require a follow up even if
           | it's hours to next day later when they know it's not an
           | emergency
        
           | gerdesj wrote:
           | What is bloody annoying is that you can't even test 999. When
           | you set up a PBX it would be nice to know that it would work
           | via the obvious way of actually calling it.
           | 
           | Surely it would be possible to create a test version which
           | gets terminated by a computer instead of hassling an operator
           | - you could send DTMF codes or something similar to indicate
           | a test.
           | 
           | I suspect that there is a little more to your story. Probably
           | that the fuzz had some spare capacity at the time and decided
           | to do an educational exercise on you lot - which worked
           | nicely. Nowadays you hear about all sorts of daft 999 calls -
           | there is a TV programme about it.
           | 
           | Now we are moving into the SOGEA era in the UK. That's where
           | we have "glass" phone lines (FTTP) that don't supply power
           | but have jolly fast internets. 2025 is the year that the
           | copper network gets shut down, except that it wont be! Oh and
           | we will all be using VOIP ie SIP n RTP. The final pretense of
           | circuit switching will trot off into the sunset and be
           | bundled behind a green tent and a single shot will be heard.
        
             | ocdtrekkie wrote:
             | I would be surprised if you got in trouble for occasionally
             | calling emergency services to clearly communicate you were
             | testing if it works. During normal operations they should
             | have extra capacity and they presumably also would like you
             | to be confident you can reach emergency services in an
             | emergency.
        
         | ortusdux wrote:
         | I vaguely recall that there was a time when cellphone companies
         | were required to provide free 911 access. People that only
         | wanted a phone for emergencies were advised to get one and not
         | pay for service because it could still dial 911.
        
           | actionfromafar wrote:
           | I think that still is the case in Europe?
        
             | floren wrote:
             | It's still the case in the US, pop your SIM out and note
             | it'll still say "Emergency calls only" on your lock screen.
        
         | emrehan wrote:
         | FCC has rules for calling 911, and many state statutes
         | reinforce or extend FCC rules.
         | 
         | Tin Can is probably not bound by these rules, but it looks like
         | a phone and works like a phone. In an emergency where seconds
         | matter, it better not fail anyone.
         | 
         | Enabling 911 calls for all could not only save lives, but also
         | save the company from lawsuits.
        
       | turnsout wrote:
       | This is really cool--love the branding, concept and even the
       | price point.
       | 
       | My cynical side thinks there's probably unlimited money to be
       | made taking items from Millennials' youth and marketing it to
       | their kids on a subscription model (I realize there's a
       | subscription-free way to use Tin Can).
        
       | digi604 wrote:
       | Why subscription service on top?
        
         | saubeidl wrote:
         | Companies like making money.
        
         | ars wrote:
         | The covers the cost of calling actual phone numbers, which
         | probably does cost the company something.
         | 
         | The direct calls are free, and don't have a fee, because those
         | go over the internet.
        
         | wrs wrote:
         | Making real phone calls costs real money.
        
         | JKCalhoun wrote:
         | > Bestie has a Tin Can? Free calling to other Tin Cans is
         | included for every device, no subscription required.
         | 
         | > Subject to a valid account & our terms of service.
         | 
         | Yeah, subscription aside (though that alone is a deal-breaker
         | for me) I don't like it requiring an account.
         | 
         | Might there be a way that an open-software/hardware device
         | could simply have a person enter, what, a friend's IP address
         | to make a call? Or is there more middleware required to connect
         | the two VoIP?
        
       | bigyabai wrote:
       | Neat, but is this one of those things that becomes plastic
       | e-waste the moment you stop supporting the service connecting it?
        
         | floren wrote:
         | Of course!
         | 
         | "+Lifetime calling subject to _continued availability of our
         | services_ , a valid account, and our terms of service."
         | 
         | Unless they open it up enough that you can change the VOIP
         | server it uses.
        
           | ars wrote:
           | Agreed, I would be much more likely to buy this if I had some
           | kind of assurance it would not stop working.
           | 
           | Maybe instead of a flat $75, charge $5/month for the first 15
           | months.
        
         | JKCalhoun wrote:
         | Someone should open source something similar.
         | 
         | Why is everyone looking at me? I'm busy obsessing over how to
         | bring BBS's back.
        
       | ceocoder wrote:
       | Love it!
       | 
       | To quote Dennis Duffy - The Beeper King - technology is cyclical!
       | 
       | https://youtu.be/bzm53FAo_q0?si=GNAiR_fgfL3xHNFX
        
       | darepublic wrote:
       | nostalgia as a service
        
       | Nevermark wrote:
       | If there was an adapter version, for real old school phones, that
       | would be fun.
       | 
       | There are so many real old school styles. [0]
       | 
       | [0]
       | https://www.ebay.com/sch/i.html?_nkw=vintage+phone&_sacat=0&...
       | 
       | [0]
       | https://www.ebay.com/sch/i.html?_nkw=scooby+phone&_sacat=0&_...
        
       | kevmo wrote:
       | You'd be better off just activating a real landline and not using
       | an app.
        
       | sugarpimpdorsey wrote:
       | Is this just an ad for a VoIP service?
       | 
       | Your residential internet provider will probably already sell you
       | VoIP that you can plug a real phone into.
       | 
       | Put that old hamburger phone to good use.
        
         | derwiki wrote:
         | I wouldn't call it an ad because I'm unaffiliated. I thought it
         | was a neat techie gadget that other HN readers might enjoy.
        
         | tiagod wrote:
         | And Dropbox is just rsync.
         | 
         | The value is in the app for the parents. I would pay $10 not to
         | deal with shitty VoIP interfaces.
        
           | derwiki wrote:
           | Several comments in this thread give "Dropbox is just rsync"
           | vibes. I'm curious how many of the commenters suggesting to
           | DIY understand that having small children means essentially
           | no free time to hack on something like that.
        
             | tiagod wrote:
             | And it's mostly tech workers here. I would say most parents
             | are not technically inclined. It would take the average Joe
             | god knows how many hours to set something like this up.
             | Even for a techie, and even if you value your time at only
             | $10/h it would be worth it even if it took only a weekend
             | of hacking something together, and you get something that
             | was built specifically to your use-case.
        
       | bityard wrote:
       | For technical parents, you can do this with a SIP server, a pair
       | of ATAs, and of course the phones. No subscription needed.
        
         | spankalee wrote:
         | For those of us who are aware that these things exist, but now
         | how they all integrate: how do you go from SIP server to actual
         | phone service?
         | 
         | Are you meaning that the SIP server is shared by all the
         | friends in the network who want to talk to each other, or that
         | you can get phone service via the SIP server?
         | 
         | My dad worked on a lot of VOIP equipment in his career, so I
         | always kind of wanted to do this, but don't like the $10/month
         | for something almost never used, and got my kid a phone anyway
         | because the portability and camera are pretty key. We just
         | control the phone so that it acts like a land-line. I might be
         | templated to do a VOIP setup for the house any if were easy
         | enough.
        
       | freddie_mercury wrote:
       | It's a little bit hard to figure out from the marketing but...is
       | this just a regular old VOIP phone for $75 + $10/month? The same
       | that Vonage, Ooma, axvoice, voiply, and others offer? Sometimes
       | your ISP will even give it to you free or very cheap (we have it
       | free with ours but don't have a phone plugged in to it).
        
         | __float wrote:
         | Do these services have anything like the easy-to-use allowlist
         | feature? There seems to be some value in the parent-friendly
         | angle here.
        
       | lukas099 wrote:
       | Man, I like this idea but I also really love this website.
        
       | bja wrote:
       | This just seems like another VOIP service wrapped in nostalgia.
       | There are MANY cheaper and better options. I say this because I
       | recently added a VOIP line for exactly this reason to give my
       | kids a way to call their friends without a smart phone.
       | 
       | Here are many good options https://www.ooma.com/blog/home-
       | phone/best-voip-service-for-h...
        
         | turnsout wrote:
         | Keep in mind, the main use case is allowing kids to call their
         | friends and family _and no one else._
         | 
         | VoIP nerds out there, is there any simple PFSense equivalent
         | for VoIP that would allow you to DIY this? Basically restrict
         | inbound and outbound calls to a whitelist?
        
           | wffurr wrote:
           | Some of the providers on that link have "allowlist" as a
           | feature, but I am curious how easy it is to manage. The
           | parent app seems like the real value proposition here.
        
           | subhro wrote:
           | Yes, get a trunk from someone like BulkVS, SignalWire and run
           | your own freeswitch or asterix. You can set up arbitrary
           | "allowed" lists. Hell you can even get fancy with lookups and
           | decide on the fly to allow a call or not.
           | 
           | There are other comments about providers, but my way is way
           | cheaper and you can run you EPBAX on a pi or even get a pre
           | made VM from Azure, Amazon, etc.
           | 
           | Damn I hate paying rent.
        
             | turnsout wrote:
             | Whoa, love this. Do you have any recommended resources if I
             | wanted to try this out? Any comments about FreeSWITCH vs
             | Asterisk, or BulkVS vs Signalwire for a simple setup like
             | this?
        
               | subhro wrote:
               | Freeswitch is more complicated and has a steeper learning
               | curve, but you can pair it with FusionPBX and it will
               | make things a lot more palatable. Asterix is the grand
               | daddy of this stuff. The community is stronger for
               | Asterix. Freeswitch is pretty much infinitely
               | customizable.
               | 
               | SignalWire is the primary sponsor of Freeswitch but is
               | mainly geared towards HUGE installations. BulkVS is
               | cheaper and better in my opinion. You can also look at
               | AnveoDirect, which is more raw than BulkVS, but you can
               | become really really fancy with it. Like, call center
               | fancy.
        
         | wffurr wrote:
         | How easy is it to manage the calling allowlist for those
         | providers? That seems to be the key value proposition here; the
         | parent app that controls the allowlist.
        
         | scosman wrote:
         | And that's fine. It's cute. It's fun. Looks like they are
         | optimizing for UX, design, and marketing.
        
       | S04dKHzrKT wrote:
       | Make note of the privacy policy[1]. Some users may not like the
       | data they collect.
       | 
       | > Information Collected from Children: As detailed in Section
       | 3.C, we collect voice audio during calls, call log information,
       | and utilize the Parent-provided contact list in relation to the
       | Child's use of the Tin Can Device. We may also collect device
       | identifiers and technical usage data related to the Service.
       | 
       | [1]: https://tincan.kids/policies/privacy-policy
        
         | neilv wrote:
         | Yeah, this was buried under a section about "child users". I
         | don't know how that's legal in a two-party consent state.
         | 
         | > _C. Information Related to Child Users (Collected via the
         | Service):_
         | 
         | > _Voice Audio Data: Audio data transmitted during calls made
         | or received on the Tin Can Device._
         | 
         | Between this, and the civil and possibly regulatory liability
         | of having 911 not necessarily work, this company might end up
         | blowing their runway and more on lawyers.
        
           | lukas099 wrote:
           | It also says,
           | 
           | > This includes the real-time transmission of voice packets
           | necessary for the call to function. If voicemail features are
           | implemented, this includes recorded voicemail greetings and
           | messages.
           | 
           | So maybe it is "collecting" the data only in these limited
           | capacities? (which seem necessary for the thing to function)
        
       | legitster wrote:
       | I really like this idea, but I have 3 pieces of feedback:
       | 
       | 1. I love the idea, but I do not love the pricing. $10 a month
       | for something you can get for free with a Voip box is tough to
       | justify.
       | 
       | 2. It looks like they are refitting "antique" phones for their
       | Flashback model. If they just sold the standalone Voip kit with
       | their service wrapped around it, then we could find our our
       | vintage hardware to use.
       | 
       | 3. Realistically, 90% of the time my son would be on this would
       | be to voice chat while playing Minecraft. So knowing that it has
       | a decent speakerphone would be nice.
        
       | ortusdux wrote:
       | It should play the dialup handshake every now and then.
        
       | idkwhattocallme wrote:
       | The local public elementary school blocked all chat programs on
       | student chromebooks. The 3rd graders figured out that they could
       | chat with another in a shared google doc. They had thousands of
       | pages of chat before the teacher finally put an end to it. The
       | teacher only found out because a kid shared that it was getting
       | unruly during class. I share this because most kids have an ipad
       | and are digital communication natives. This landline concept is
       | like puting a lid back on a can of worms.
        
         | derwiki wrote:
         | 3rd grade, sure. This seems like a great fit for my 3 year old
         | and her friends who don't have unfettered iPad access.
        
           | idkwhattocallme wrote:
           | A landline for a 3 year old to communicate with her friends.
           | lol
        
         | anotherhue wrote:
         | Google Wave!
        
           | floren wrote:
           | I only used Wave a little (because my netbook was far, far
           | too underpowered to work properly with it) but I really
           | really enjoyed it for both serious collaboration and random
           | bullshitting with my friends. Haven't seen anything
           | comparable since.
        
             | eszed wrote:
             | Wave nostalgics of the world, unite! It's the best remote
             | collaboration tool I've ever used, and imo nothing I've
             | seen since has really come close. It still baffles me that
             | it wasn't successful.
        
       | addisonj wrote:
       | I am experiencing a strong sense of "why didn't I think of that"
       | while also _really_ hoping it isn 't another strong, family
       | friendly concept that gets quickly enshittified for profit.
       | 
       | Seriously, kudos, for a great concept, good website, and really,
       | not that bad of pricing. Sure you can do it cheaper DIY... but
       | where is the fun in putting an office-styled VOIP capable phone
       | in a kid's bedroom? (though converting an old-phone to tunnel
       | over VOIP sounds like a fun weekend project to do with my pre-
       | teen)
       | 
       | But... dang, does it feel like yet another thing that will start
       | great and get terrible over time or just dropped and be e-waste.
       | Kid cell-phone plans that don't give me choice of provider,
       | youth-focused budgeting/saving apps that are 4x more expensive
       | than just a classic bank account and require an app to
       | effectively use, and by far, worst of all, all the "kid" versions
       | of tablets, youtube kids (which I can never get to not show ads
       | even though I pay for premium!), that claim to give parents
       | control... but really just seem like the minimum effort to make
       | parents feel like they are putting in guardrails while still
       | being designed to maximize the addiction early.
       | 
       | While I am really glad we are trying to build tech that helps
       | kids have a better relationship each other while still using
       | technology... it seems like most still fall to pressure of profit
       | and either term into extremely over-priced offering that is hard
       | to justify _or_ can 't make it and turn into junk with no re-use.
       | 
       | Once again, this product, right now, does not look to be that...
       | but now having been bit a few times, I am much more cautious and
       | either worry it will become e-waste or the price jacked up by 3x
       | what it is today.
        
       | TimTheTinker wrote:
       | There's a cheaper alternative, if you don't mind some manual
       | setup:
       | 
       | - buy an ethernet -> phone adapter (Grandstream, Cisco, and Poly
       | sell these) and a cheap analog phone.
       | 
       | - get an inexpensive VoIP number[0] and set up the phone adapter
       | to log into the service you set up.
       | 
       | - set up a Google Voice[1] number if you haven't already. When
       | you want to make an outgoing call, use the Google Voice app to
       | initiate a call to your VoIP number[2] -- that way you're
       | technically receiving the call there, so it's cheaper or free,
       | depending on your plan.
       | 
       | [0] CallCentric has a $3/month plan that gives you free incoming
       | calls and e911 service: https://www.callcentric.com/faq/46/529.
       | This works well if you initiate outgoing calls via the Google
       | Voice app.
       | 
       | [1] As of 2023, Google Voice doesn't work directly with Obitalk
       | VoIP service anymore, or with any other VoIP devices :(
       | 
       | [2] if you need to let kids make outgoing calls via Google Voice
       | unattended, set up the Google Voice app on an old iOS device in
       | Guided Access mode and plug it in next to the analog phone. (But
       | make sure they know to make 911 calls using the phone itself, not
       | the GVoice app. I suggest printing a "Emergency: call 911 on this
       | phone" label and putting it on the back of the handset.
        
       ___________________________________________________________________
       (page generated 2025-07-16 23:00 UTC)