this post was submitted on 18 Mar 2024
1053 points (96.6% liked)

linuxmemes

20707 readers
793 users here now

I use Arch btw


Sister communities:

Community rules

  1. Follow the site-wide rules and code of conduct
  2. Be civil
  3. Post Linux-related content
  4. No recent reposts

Please report posts and comments that break these rules!

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
 
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] fruitycoder@sh.itjust.works 2 points 6 months ago (2 children)

I really want them, from a tech stand point, to be a thing, but no doubt on the reliability issue.

The better design I've see is something like RFID in the hands that reads on the grip of the gun. Biometrics are not a good idea for any system that needs that level of reliableility. The other thing is I would want it to a trigger well replacement not a constant check (I.e. once unlocked it stays unlocked untill deliberately locked again).

[–] Lev_Astov@lemmy.world 2 points 6 months ago (2 children)

People generally won't accept implants for things like that. Supposedly Biofire has a pretty reliable smart gun coming out any time now: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2cRm9BMxl90

[–] PipedLinkBot@feddit.rocks 1 points 6 months ago

Here is an alternative Piped link(s):

https://www.piped.video/watch?v=2cRm9BMxl90

Piped is a privacy-respecting open-source alternative frontend to YouTube.

I'm open-source; check me out at GitHub.

[–] fruitycoder@sh.itjust.works 1 points 6 months ago

I've been following them! It'll be interesting for sure to see what comes out.

They are popular in the biohacker community with one girl I know with like a dozen sheusees for street magic.

If you can get them added and removed at home its less scary I think.

[–] HelixDab2@lemm.ee 2 points 6 months ago (1 children)

Even an RFID reader would be a bad thing, IMO. First and foremost, you have the issue of battery life; most people fail to check the batteries in their smoke detectors regularly, so I can't imagine people would remember to check the reader in their firearm. Secondly, given that many people that have guns have multiple guns, you would need some kind of sending unit--assuming that the firearm would be the reader, since the reader is going to be larger--that is either universal, or can be programmed and paired to multiple devices. Either one of those would still allow unauthorized users to steal your gun. Especially if they had something like a Flipper Zero that could read and modify RFID data.

Adding on to this, you may have to shoot with your off hand, or in a position where the reader isn't close enough to detect the chip; then you have a no-shoot situation, which could potentially be deadly.

I had to scan my credit card three times at the grocery store yesterday; the reader couldn't read my card. Now imagine that when someone is trying to carjack you.

I would want smart guns to be at least as reliable as a 1911--which is not a reliable firearm--before I would go for them.

[–] fruitycoder@sh.itjust.works 2 points 6 months ago

I don't think I would trust it in a reactive shoot circumstance either to be honest. I'm also not too worried about a pretty advanced cyber threat of someone both actvily attacking an RFID chip (a programable definetly adds added complexity factor to me too) and getting my firearm. Its more so if someone broke into my house and took my firearm they would have added difficulty using it or if someone is in my house, kids, guests, etc and they get ahold of it there is one added layer of safety.