Live data from Hacker News

Show HN: Jam, an Open Source Clubhouse (w/ WebRTC)

jam.systems

21–30 of 69 posts

Re: Show HN: Jam, an Open Source Clubhouse (w/ WebRTC)

#23
post #9

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Spot on. For larger rooms we will probably have to add mixing on the server side and that will definitely put more load on the server. We also want to make it super simple to spin up your own Jam for example if you are organizing a micro conference over a weekend and for that we will need to better understand what that means so we can recommend what kind of server/specs to go for. Thanks a lot for bringing this quest…

Amazing work! The WebRTC community needs something like this so bad. Not only will this push a bunch of users toward self-hosted/free software but will also inspire others to build cool things :) If/when you hit scaling challenges I would love to help! I maintain github.com/pion/turn and github.com/pion/webrtc. One of the reasons I built it was so that I could put my TURN and Signaling server in the same process. It…

Very interesting, thank you for the pointer Sean, followed you on Github and will check out pion!

Re: Show HN: Jam, an Open Source Clubhouse (w/ WebRTC)

#24
post #3

I don't have access to Clubhouse but don't you lose an additional ton of valuable information when there is no video? Like non-physical (video) communication already has its challenges but this takes them to another level. Or am I missing something here?

I don't get the point of Clubhouse. Hasn't many video meeting apps already supported turning off video streaming in chatting?

Re: Show HN: Jam, an Open Source Clubhouse (w/ WebRTC)

#25
post #2

Hi everyone, a few days ago @DoubleMalt, @mitschabaude and me did a one-day hackathon to see if we can get a minimal WebRTC based version of a Clubhouse-style "room" to work. Since then we added a TURN server, bug fixes ("can you hear me?") and a bit of ui polishing. It is still early (please don't be too harsh) but you should find Jam to be quite usable as it is right now. Jam runs in any modern browser, at least th…

I like the Ux, very simple and responsive. It would be great if users on the stage could share a file with everyone else.

Re: Show HN: Jam, an Open Source Clubhouse (w/ WebRTC)

#27
post #24
post #3

I don't have access to Clubhouse but don't you lose an additional ton of valuable information when there is no video? Like non-physical (video) communication already has its challenges but this takes them to another level. Or am I missing something here?

I don't get the point of Clubhouse. Hasn't many video meeting apps already supported turning off video streaming in chatting?

I think Clubhouse’s community and interest-oriented spaces will probably be its key differentiating feature. Video meeting apps are generally targeted towards known audiences, while Clubhouse lets you spontaneously hop into a room with strangers.

Re: Show HN: Jam, an Open Source Clubhouse (w/ WebRTC)

#28
Could you build this on top of Agora ? That would make it much nicer from an open-source perspective. It's one of the only services that can carry the backend audio scalably.

The product side is far more interesting...than the carrier api. Not worth spending time over that.

Other alternatives are Twilio, Daily.co, etc

Re: Show HN: Jam, an Open Source Clubhouse (w/ WebRTC)

#29
post #25
post #2

Hi everyone, a few days ago @DoubleMalt, @mitschabaude and me did a one-day hackathon to see if we can get a minimal WebRTC based version of a Clubhouse-style "room" to work. Since then we added a TURN server, bug fixes ("can you hear me?") and a bit of ui polishing. It is still early (please don't be too harsh) but you should find Jam to be quite usable as it is right now. Jam runs in any modern browser, at least th…

I like the Ux, very simple and responsive. It would be great if users on the stage could share a file with everyone else.

throw in file.pizza!

Re: Show HN: Jam, an Open Source Clubhouse (w/ WebRTC)

#30

Could you build this on top of Agora ? That would make it much nicer from an open-source perspective. It's one of the only services that can carry the backend audio scalably. The product side is far more interesting...than the carrier api. Not worth spending time over that. Other alternatives are Twilio, Daily.co, etc

Mumble would be a good choice to keep it entirely open source.
Post reply on HN