[HN Gopher] RuBee
       ___________________________________________________________________
        
       RuBee
        
       Author : Sniffnoy
       Score  : 328 points
       Date   : 2025-11-24 03:08 UTC (19 hours ago)
        
 (HTM) web link (computer.rip)
 (TXT) w3m dump (computer.rip)
        
       | jjmarr wrote:
       | > I have at least a few readers for which the sound of a man's
       | voice saying "government cell phone detected" will elicit a
       | palpable reaction.
       | 
       | Can this be recreated as an audio clip for jumpscaring former
       | govt employees?
        
         | quamserena wrote:
         | Why not just rip the audio file off? Would make for a funny DC
         | request
         | 
         | Edit: On second thought this could be an OPSEC problem. Sorry
         | but I don't know if anyone can help you :(
        
           | jjmarr wrote:
           | I bet the tts voice is public and something made by AT&T in
           | the 80s or 90s.
        
             | progbits wrote:
             | Why TTS if it's just a static phrase? More likely that a
             | random developer recorded that sentence and the wav is
             | hardcoded in all the units.
        
               | teddyh wrote:
               | It might be that the law around voice recordings are not
               | as simple as we might imagine.
        
           | themafia wrote:
           | If I were the president I would install this on random doors
           | in the White House as a prank. It would be fun to watch the
           | NSC fumble for their phone when walking into the oval.
        
       | Antibabelic wrote:
       | Why can't the manufacturers market "smart guns" outside the US?
       | Surely, the NRA's grip isn't world-spanning.
        
         | rhinoceraptor wrote:
         | I would imagine that any manufacturer being seen doing so,
         | would face US consumer boycotts.
        
         | aloha2436 wrote:
         | The US is the largest market for firearms, so the NRA can use
         | the threat of boycotting a manufacturer within the states to
         | prevent the technology gaining traction elsewhere.
        
           | Antibabelic wrote:
           | Aren't there manufacturers that only really target local
           | markets that could profit from this technology, e.g. in
           | China, ex-USSR or South America?
        
             | xixixao wrote:
             | I could not locate credible evidence of a major firearm
             | manufacturer that completely refrains from selling into the
             | U.S. civilian market. (ChatGPT)
             | 
             | Glock, Koch, Taurus, even Czech Zbrojovka all sell to US.
             | 
             | Kalashnikov can't atm, but also probably doesn't share the
             | safety concern.
        
             | anonymous908213 wrote:
             | To profit, they would first have to sell the goods. Who is
             | actually in the market for a smart gun? Consumers aren't,
             | surely. There is virtually no upside to your gun tracking
             | you, at your own expense of buying a more complex piece of
             | tech to boot. So that leaves something like (apparently)
             | New Jersey where the government would compel purchases of
             | smart guns because they were interested in the tracking.
             | But eg. China simply don't allow citizens to purchase guns
             | period. There may be some application to applying it to
             | state-owned firearms to track military and police usage,
             | but deploying that at Chinese scale would be an extremely
             | expensive endeavour for what appears to be a solution in
             | search of a problem. Not to mention the biometric lock
             | concept, if implemented, is introducing an entire new axis
             | of unreliability to a life-or-death tool.
        
               | pabs3 wrote:
               | Gun owners in the US probably wouldn't want their gun to
               | be used against them in a home invasion, or by their
               | child at a school. Seems like that could be a large-ish
               | market. Especially if you can lobby regulators in favor
               | of making it a requirement for all or some people.
        
               | avidiax wrote:
               | You are right that gun owners wouldn't want those things,
               | but they are unlikely to want a smart gun as a solution
               | to those things.
               | 
               | They want the gun to be available to them, and not be
               | under duress to use a fingerprint reader or pin pad or
               | RFID ring to do it.
               | 
               | Responsible gun owners keep guns out of children's hands
               | by locking them up or supervising them, and irresponsible
               | ones aren't going to want to pay extra for smart
               | features.
               | 
               | I think there's a very narrow range of smart features,
               | something like a gun that is unlocked when removed from a
               | holster, but locks up if it is dropped or grabbed, that
               | might be interesting. That makes having the gun taken
               | from an officer less of a threat, which might have an
               | institutional appeal. Give it a 10-hour maintenance mode
               | so that it can be used as a "nightstand gun" while
               | automatically being locked if left idle for longer, and
               | it would basically meet the needs of police both on and
               | off-duty.
        
               | derbOac wrote:
               | In my personal experience gun owners want mechanical
               | foolproofness too. They want something that's not going
               | to lock up or fail or discharge at the wrong time. Smart
               | features just add a layer of complexity with fail
               | possibilities to address a problem that many of them
               | would prefer to be addressed differently anyway.
        
               | skissane wrote:
               | I think a country like Australia could be a good starting
               | point for smart guns. Yes, not a very big market-around
               | 8% of US population, with significantly lower rates of
               | gun ownership-but culturally more open to gun control,
               | with a much weaker gun rights lobby, and a marked
               | political tendency towards surveillance and "nanny state"
               | regulation
        
               | numpad0 wrote:
               | IIRC Australia doesn't have legal frameworks for gun
               | ownership for the purpose of self defense, and there's no
               | great implementation of smart guns in the first place.
               | 
               | A smart gun is like an AWS authenticated motor twisting
               | ballpoint pen. Just no one ever seriously pays for such a
               | thing, and it has not even been seriously made if it ever
               | was actually conceived. Making it a requirement is
               | basically out of question.
        
               | skissane wrote:
               | > Making it a requirement is basically out of question
               | 
               | Why? If there's the political will, it is doable. There
               | are Australian gun manufacturers (e.g. Lithgow Arms,
               | owned by Thales)-and if none of them are willing to
               | cooperate, the government can always start their own gun
               | manufacturer. Indeed, Lithgow Arms was founded in 1912 as
               | a government-owned arms manufacturer, and remained in
               | public hands until the Australian federal government sold
               | it to Thales in 2006.
        
               | numpad0 wrote:
               | Same reasons as why things like Clipper Chips isn't
               | happening. It completely lacks technical basis, and even
               | political consensus gets sketchy quick.
               | 
               | Post-war Commonwealth nations are generally bad at gun
               | designs as well - UK tried once and produced an infantry
               | rifle that will(not could) seriously injure its user if
               | held and fired in left hand. So even if forced, the
               | approved gun will be more of a theoretical product, and
               | the smart gun mandate will just be a less politically
               | viable alternative to total firearms ban.
        
         | xixixao wrote:
         | I see at least two problems with smart guns though:
         | 
         | 1. Temper resistance is not temper impossibility 2. If a tag
         | allows tracking, bad actors might track good actors?
        
         | skinkestek wrote:
         | Because it's just a bad idea.
         | 
         | Most of the world doesn't need that whole setup because:
         | 
         | - Our cultural baseline around firearms is completely
         | different. Countries like Denmark, Sweden, Finland,
         | Switzerland, Austria, and the Czech Republic have plenty of
         | guns at home - and historically, a lot of them were actual
         | assault rifles, not "looks-spicy" semiautos.
         | 
         | - We treat guns like weapons. They live in safes, not
         | nightstands, and kids get taught safety early, the same way
         | you'd teach them not to put a fork in a power supply.
        
           | atemerev wrote:
           | The Swiss do have a lot of guns at home. However, you cannot
           | carry (or even transport guns that are not discharged). Just
           | take them at a shooting range - a popular pastime for Swiss
           | people.
        
           | throw-qqqqq wrote:
           | > Countries like Denmark, Sweden, Finland, Switzerland,
           | Austria, and the Czech Republic have plenty of guns at home
           | 
           | None of those countries are anywhere near US levels of gun
           | ownership. See the table here: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/
           | Estimated_number_of_civilian_g...
           | 
           | USA has 120 guns pr 100 citizens. Of the countries on your
           | list, Finland is next with 32. Denmark has 10.
           | 
           | > and historically, a lot of them were actual assault rifles
           | 
           | Fully automatic weapons are not legal for civilians in
           | Denmark at least.
           | 
           | Many semiautos are also banned. Semiauto shotguns must be
           | restricted to hold only two shells and you need a special
           | license even for that.
           | 
           | I don't disagree with your general point, but you're not
           | making a good comparison IMO.
        
             | iviv wrote:
             | > Fully automatic weapons are not legal for civilians in
             | Denmark at least.
             | 
             | Same in Finland.
        
         | tonyhart7 wrote:
         | smart guns is future dystopian
        
           | actionfromafar wrote:
           | regular guns is current dystopian
        
             | tonyhart7 wrote:
             | so knife is past dystopian????
        
               | sawjet wrote:
               | Rock was the original topia
        
             | baiac wrote:
             | Regular guns in the hands of the people is the opposite of
             | dystopian.
        
         | atemerev wrote:
         | There are barely any civilian gun markets outside the US. US is
         | really really unique in their relationship to guns.
        
           | setopt wrote:
           | This. There's many countries that allow civilians firearms
           | (e.g. Canada and much of Europe), but generally for hunting
           | purposes and thus more likely to be rifles and shotguns than
           | concealable handguns.
        
         | numpad0 wrote:
         | The tech just isn't there; hand-held guns don't benefit from a
         | computerized firing system at all. So any smart feature on
         | human sized guns and less will be totally removable addons, and
         | that completely defeats its purpose.
         | 
         | Many tanks and planes do have smart guns. Electronic firing
         | control with additional software features that impede firing
         | are beneficial and totally fine at that scale.
        
           | actionfromafar wrote:
           | Seems it's coming though.
           | https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SMASH_Handheld
        
             | numpad0 wrote:
             | That's just a scope. Comes right off and the gun reverts to
             | a regular M4.
             | 
             | Most(though not all) other smart gun attempts work in a
             | similar fashion; the host gun works exactly as it were,
             | except an extraneous metal bit inhibits firing. If the bit
             | was removed or held down, it reverts to the original host
             | gun and fires normally. As such, the extra bit is literally
             | extraneous, irrelevant to the gun's working.
        
         | refurb wrote:
         | The correct answer is - all the designs so far aren't great.
         | 
         | The military would love a smart gun to cut down on accidental
         | discharges. Cops would love it to stop weapons being used
         | against cops.
         | 
         | The issue is that it has to have a very high reliability (you
         | don't want it to fail to fire while a suspect is shooting at
         | you). And not much point if it only works "sometimes" with
         | unauthorized users.
        
       | DeathArrow wrote:
       | Can someone explain how communication can take place using only
       | magnetic fields? I thought that communication requires electro
       | magnetic waves which require an oscillating electro magnetic
       | field.
        
         | 1116574 wrote:
         | I went into a slight hunt for more knowledge after reading
         | this, and long story short you need to search NFMI (near field
         | magnetic induction)[1]. As far as I can see from my limited
         | reading the main use case of the tech is nfc (near field comm)
         | and true wireless earbuds.
         | 
         | https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Near-field_magnetic_induction_...
        
           | DeathArrow wrote:
           | Thanks, this will be an interesting read.
        
         | johncolanduoni wrote:
         | A changing magnetic field will always induce an electrical
         | field and vice-versa. Even just moving a magnet with your hand
         | will generate an electrical field. Near-field effects of an
         | antenna still involve this interaction.
         | 
         | The key to the resistance of very long wavelengths of EM
         | radiation (or equivalently, very slowly varying
         | electric/magnetic fields) to attenuation when traveling through
         | a metal is the nature of the way metals expel electric fields
         | (they don't generally block magnetic fields). When you apply a
         | static electric field to a thin conductor, electrons will be
         | pulled away from one side and toward the other such that the
         | field inside is zero. However this migration of charges will
         | actually result in the electric field on the far side of the
         | metal being nearly the same as the field on the side closer to
         | the source!
         | 
         | If the wavelength of some EM radiation is much longer than a
         | metal obstacle is thick, the fact that the electric field is
         | excluded from the interior of the metal won't matter much. Even
         | if the metal wasn't there, the electric field strength wouldn't
         | vary much over that distance, and on the other side of the
         | metal the induced charges will restore the roughly "correct"
         | field. Since the magnetic component won't vary much over that
         | distance either, the fact that there's no varying electric
         | field inside the conductor to reinforce the magnetic field
         | won't significantly attenuate it.
         | 
         | If you're familiar with Faraday cages, this will sound all
         | wrong. Isn't it long wavelengths they can block, and short
         | wavelengths they can't? This true when dealing with EM
         | radiation in the "normal" radio bands and higher, but it turns
         | out their ability to attenuate radiation falls off in the other
         | direction too (once wavelengths get extremely long). When
         | dealing with EM properties of materials, there are a huge
         | number of different effects that apply in different
         | circumstances, and it's easy to forget one and confuse
         | yourself.
        
       | macleginn wrote:
       | Any idea where the name came from?
        
         | pnut wrote:
         | Google says
         | 
         | > RuBee is an acronym for "Radio U.S. Bureau of Engraving and
         | Printing",
         | 
         | Weirdly not related at all to Zigbee's naming origins, in spite
         | of their technological similarity.
        
           | jadamson wrote:
           | RuBep? As ever, the fastest way to get a correct answer on
           | the internet is to post an incorrect one:
           | 
           | > The Institute of Electrical & Electronics Engineers Inc.,
           | the international governing group for such technology, has
           | designated P1901.1 as the technical designation given to the
           | RuBee technology, which was named RuBee by Visible Assets.
           | "There is no real reason we named it RuBee," said Mr.
           | Stevens. "It actually was named after the song 'Ruby
           | Tuesday.' It just sounded good."
           | 
           | https://theproducenews.com/print/pdf/node/1355 (PDF)
           | 
           | I'd assume "ZigBee" was also an inspiration.
        
       | petesergeant wrote:
       | > the firearms lobby is very influential on police departments,
       | as are police unions which generally oppose technical
       | accountability measures
       | 
       | A lot of what's wrong in surprisingly few words
        
       | drewlesueur wrote:
       | I like the Univers-like font on this page.
        
         | jtvjan wrote:
         | i'm a little bit sad the kernel diagram background is gone
        
       | Lio wrote:
       | > _Long ago I wrote about ANT+, for example, a failed personal
       | area network standard designed mostly around fitness
       | applications._
       | 
       | I didn't know ANT+ was "failed", I use it all the time with my
       | Garmin products. It's cheap and it works better than Bluetooth.
       | 
       | I have ANT+ cadence and heart rate sensors. Lights, camera, Varia
       | radar and power meter.
       | 
       | Some of that can be done with Bluetooth but realistically not all
       | at the same time.
       | 
       | Anyone that's run a smart trainer in a group with others will
       | know that ANT+ is generally more reliable than Bluetooth too.
       | 
       | Apple refuse to support ANT+ so I need a dongle for my Mac and
       | it's the reason I don't have an Apple Watch. No biggie.
        
         | g0ran wrote:
         | "In 2025, Garmin announced that they would end their
         | certification for ANT+ devices, blaming changes in wireless
         | communication regulations. This is likely to lead to future
         | devices dropping ANT+ support in favour of BLE."
         | 
         | https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ANT_(network)
         | 
         | I believe that's what the author was referring to when
         | describing it as failed, but yes, this could've been worded
         | better.
        
           | Lio wrote:
           | Aha! OK that's sad news but makes perfect sense. Thanks.
        
           | HeyLaughingBoy wrote:
           | That's interesting. As the article says, ANT's main use case
           | is in commercial gym equipment. What the article doesn't say
           | is the reason: it excels at gathering data for "group
           | fitness". ANT is a connectionless protocol so in a situation
           | where you have two dozen transmitters and you need to get
           | data from all of them, your receiver simply has to listen and
           | record whatever devices it sees and let the user software
           | (possibly managing a gym leaderboard for a spin class) decide
           | which ones to track.
           | 
           | Contrast with BLE where you would have to make a connection
           | to each device. The overhead of connecting and disconnecting,
           | in addition to being power-prohibitive, takes too long. Some
           | manufacturers have workarounds to enable use of their BLE
           | products in a group fitness environment, but they are pretty
           | much lacking.
           | 
           | It'll be interesting to see how the problem is solved if
           | indeed ANT+ does go away.
        
             | IshKebab wrote:
             | BLE could do that too via advertising packets. I don't know
             | if any devices actually do though.
             | 
             | Also the connection process isn't power-prohibitive for
             | BLE, and it doesn't _have_ to take a long time. It 's just
             | that most Bluetooth software stacks suck balls. Basically
             | only Apple's is good.
             | 
             | As I recall BLE only supports hosts connecting to 7
             | peripherals simultaneously which is a bit rubbish, but if
             | you're a gym with some custom ANT+ receiver you can
             | definitely get a custom BLE receiver that can connect to
             | more devices (assuming someone makes such a thing).
        
         | SuperNinKenDo wrote:
         | The ANT+ article was really interesting and it seems like a
         | real shame that it's going the way of the dodo. Now I know what
         | those little status symbols are on some of the gym equipment.
         | Seems like a great protocol for the use case, but nit massively
         | surprising it couldn't survive on that niche alone. Shame.
        
           | derbOac wrote:
           | My impression was part of the issue was ANT is a proprietary
           | Garmin protocol and so never really gained traction or
           | imprint beyond those devices. Without meaning to sound too
           | critical or supportive of BLE, I think something more open
           | would be better for that area anyway.
        
       | arcanemachiner wrote:
       | I love this blog author's writing style. It's very engaging, and
       | draws me into subjects I would otherwise have minimal interest
       | in.
       | 
       | Definitely gonna check out some more of their posts later.
        
       | themafia wrote:
       | > refrigeration. Samples being shipped to the lab and reagents
       | shipped out to clinics were both temperature sensitive. Providers
       | had to verify that these materials had stayed adequately cold
       | throughout shipping and handling, [...] Moreover, Stevens
       | imagined that these sensors would be in continuous communication.
       | There's a lot of overlap between this application and personal
       | area networks (PANs), protocols like Bluetooth
       | 
       | I like the low-fi solution personally:
       | 
       | https://www.ipack.com/warmmark-temperature-indicator-short-r...
       | 
       | https://www.ipack.com/coldmark-temperature-indicator-10c-50f...
        
         | IgorPartola wrote:
         | That will tell you if the item is spoiled, not alert you that
         | it is on its way to being spoiled. Very different use cases and
         | outcomes.
        
       | b7kich wrote:
       | .kk
        
       | krogenx wrote:
       | Are there any places where a hobbyist could purchase a tag or
       | reader?
        
         | jethro_tell wrote:
         | Seems doubtful as this guy has spent a lot of time wigg the
         | this and can't get one.
        
       ___________________________________________________________________
       (page generated 2025-11-24 23:01 UTC)