HN user

russ

632 karma

YC S07

Posts14
Comments160
View on HN

This is very cool! I’ve wanted something like CodeMic for a long time.

Back when I was at Twitter, we used Review Board for code reviews (this was in 2009, before GH was a thing for most companies). It was tough to thoughtfully review large branches, especially for parts of the codebase that I wasn’t familiar with. I remember thinking, if I could somehow record the development process for a PR I was reviewing, it would be easier to understand what the submitter was trying to accomplish and how they went about doing so. I found myself more so reviewing code style instead of functionality, architecture, or design.

I watched most of the intro video, but didn’t go deeper on the site. Does CM integrate easily into the code review/PR process? I suppose I could just attach a link in any PR description?

Great work!

This is super cool. One neat idea: when I'm in offline mode, I can clone my voice, provide some context data/sources, and have my AI clone answer calls for me. It can give me a summary of conversations it had each day and allow me to follow up.

You really don’t need to know about WebRTC at all when you use LiveKit. That’s largely thanks to the SDKs abstracting away all the complexity. Having good SDKs that work across every platform with consistent APIs is more valuable than the SFU imo. There are other options for SFUs and folks like Signal have rolled their own. Try to get WebRTC running on Apple Vision Pro or tvOS and let me know if that’s no big deal.

Which components feel ad hoc?

In most real applications, the agent has additional logic (function calling, RAG, etc) than simply relaying a stream to the model server. In those cases, you want it to be a separate service/component that can be independently scaled.

It's using the same model/engine. I don't have knowledge of the internals, but a different subsystem/set of dedicated resources though for API traffic versus first-party apps.

One thing to note is there is no separate TTS-phase here, it's happening internally within GPT-4o, in the Realtime API and Advanced Voice.

Zoom does use a custom protocol. This is why it doesn’t work nearly as well when you take a call in the browser client. Not because WebRTC isn’t up to the task, but because Zoom hasn’t invested in it.

Ignoring costs, while having someone host infra for you will always be easier than managing it yourself, I think we’ve really improved the DX of hosting your own WebRTC infra with LiveKit: https://github.com/livekit/livekit

HLS is a client-driven protocol, so it has high-scale but variable latency. You could build a mostly one-way webinar experience using it, but definitely not a conference call experience.

The primary issue with traditional WebRTC media servers and services is they didn’t horizontally scale. That’s changed recently. You can get pretty high numbers of users in a single WebRTC session now.

It really depends on the use case. In vanilla WebRTC, all media is transmitted directly between peers. In practice, this doesn’t scale beyond 5-10 users in a session. Most home internet connections can’t sustain that amount of upstream bandwidth.

Yeah! Wanted a really fast/frictionless way for people to jump into a context based on signals in their environment. This was also around the time of Color (the photo app which raised 40m or something off just a pitch deck) — “ambient computing” was becoming part of the zeitgeist.

Thanks for the kind words! <3