[HN Gopher] Asterisk AI Voice Agent
___________________________________________________________________
Asterisk AI Voice Agent
Author : akrulino
Score : 182 points
Date : 2025-12-24 23:25 UTC (23 hours ago)
(HTM) web link (github.com)
(TXT) w3m dump (github.com)
| johnebgd wrote:
| I welcome the spam calls from our asterisk overlords.
| VladVladikoff wrote:
| I'm honestly surprised it hasn't been more prevalent yet. I
| still get call centre type spam calls where you can hear all
| the background noise of the rest of the call centre.
| userbinator wrote:
| Is the background noise real, or is it also AI-generated to
| make you think that it's a human?
| tartoran wrote:
| The background noise is a recording for sure, no AI needed,
| just a background noise audiofile in a loop would do.
| VladVladikoff wrote:
| Why though? It adds nothing positive, it only makes me
| sure it is a scam call.
| the_af wrote:
| I assume it's to make it seem like an actual call center
| rather than a scam. I recently got two phone scam
| attempts (credit card related) that sounded exactly like
| this.
| ldenoue wrote:
| I built a voice AI stack and background noise can be
| really helpful to a restaurant AI for example. Italian
| background music or cafe background is part of the brand.
| It's not meant to make the caller believe this is not a
| bot but only to make the AI call on brand.
| grim_io wrote:
| You can call it what ever you like, but to me this is
| deceptive.
|
| Where is the difference between this and Indian support
| staff pretending to be in your vicinity by telling you
| about the local weather? Your version is arguably even
| worse because it can plausibly fool people more
| competently.
| SoftTalker wrote:
| you actually answer unknown callers?
| the_af wrote:
| Yes. Sometimes it's a legit call. Not often, though.
|
| Example of legit calls: the pizza delivery guy decided to
| call my phone instead of ringing the bell, for whatever
| reason.
| mcny wrote:
| I worked door dash for a couple of days and there were
| multiple people who wrote in all caps to not ring the
| door bell. Why? I have no idea.
| SoftTalker wrote:
| Probably because it make their dogs go nuts.
| Loughla wrote:
| Yes. I own a business.
| mcny wrote:
| Also, it only takes one legitimate collect call from a
| jail from a loved one and now I'm all in favor of reform
| in our jail system.
|
| No, it does not cost over thirty dollars to allow someone
| accused to call their loved ones. We pay taxes. I want my
| government to use the taxes and provide these calls for
| free.
| haroldp wrote:
| I was more thinking I could add it to my Asterisk server to
| honey-pot the spam callers into an infinite time waster cycle.
| Daviey wrote:
| "Hello, this is Lenny" - well known Asterisk configuration
| from 20 years ago.
| krater23 wrote:
| Please don't. I had a talk with a shitty AI bot on a Fedex line.
| It's absolute crap. Just give me a 'Type 1 for x, type 2 for y'.
| Then I don't need to guess what are the possibilities.
| EvanAnderson wrote:
| Voice-controlled phone systems are hugely rage-inducing for me.
| I am often in loud setting with background chatter. Muting my
| audio and using a touchtone keypad is so much more accurate and
| easy than having to find a quiet place and worrying that
| somebody is going to say something that the voice response
| system detects.
| ssl-3 wrote:
| I hate those, too. Especially when others are around.
|
| The interface is so inconsistent between different
| implementations that they're always terribly awkward to
| navigate at best, and completely infuriating at worst. I
| don't like presenting the image of an progressively-angrier
| man who is standing around and speaking incongruous short
| phrases that are clearly directed towards nobody at all.
|
| But I've found that many of them still accept DTMF. Just mash
| a button instead of utter a response, and a more-traditional
| IVR tree shows up with a spoken list of enumerated options.
| Things get a lot better after that.
|
| Like pushing buttons at the gas pump to try to silence the
| ad-roll, it's pretty low-cost to try.
| 9x39 wrote:
| One problem is once you're in deep building a phone IVR
| workflow beyond X or Y (yes, these are intentional), callers
| don't care about some deep and featured input menu. They just
| mash 0 or pick a random option and demand a human finish the
| job and transfer them - understandably.
|
| When you're committed to phone intent complexity (hell), the AI
| assisted options are sort of less bad since you don't have to
| explain the menu to callers, they just make demands.
| tartoran wrote:
| What if the goal is to keep gaslighting you until you give up
| your demands?
| 9x39 wrote:
| Most voice agents for large companies are a calculated game
| to deter customers from expensive humans as we know, but
| not always.
|
| Sort of like how Jira can be a streamlined tool or a prison
| of 50-step workflows, it's all up to the designer.
| 8note wrote:
| you bought something from the wrong company, and you arent
| gonna get helped by phone, bot, or person
| cyberax wrote:
| Well, the future is here:
| https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HbDnxzrbxn4
| russdill wrote:
| The problem here is that if it's something a voice assistant
| can solve, I can solve it from my account. I'm calling because
| I need to speak to an actual human.
| hectormalot wrote:
| Im in this business, and used to think the same. It turns out
| this is a minority of callers. Some examples:
|
| - a client were working does advertising in TV commercials,
| and a few percent of their calls is people trying to cancel
| their TV subscriptions, even though they are in healthcare -
| in the troubleshooting flow for a client with a physical
| product, 40% of calls are resolved after the "did you try
| turning it off and on again" step. - a health insurance
| client has 25% of call volume for something that is available
| self-service (and very visible as well), yet people still
| call. - a client in the travel space gets a lot of calls
| about: "does my accommodation include X", and employees just
| use their public website to answer those questions. (I.e.,
| it's clearly available for self-service)
|
| One of the things we tend to prioritize in the initial
| conversation is to determine in which segment you fall and
| route accordingly.
| mcny wrote:
| (reposting because something ate your newlines, I've added
| comments in line)
|
| Im in this business, and used to think the same. It turns
| out this is a minority of callers. Some examples:
|
| - a client were working does advertising in TV commercials,
| and a few percent of their calls is people trying to cancel
| their TV subscriptions, even though they are in healthcare
|
| I guess these are probably desperate people who are trying
| to get to someone, anyone. In my opinion, the best thing
| people can do is get a really good credit card and do a
| charge back for things like this.
|
| - in the troubleshooting flow for a client with a physical
| product, 40% of calls are resolved after the "did you try
| turning it off and on again" step.
|
| I bought a Chinese wifi mesh router and it literally finds
| a time between two am and five am and reboots itself every
| night, by default. You can turn this behavior off but it
| was interesting that it does this by default.
|
| - a health insurance client has 25% of call volume for
| something that is available self-service (and very visible
| as well), yet people still call.
|
| In my defense, I've been on the other side of this. I try
| to avoid calling but whenever I use self service, it feels
| like ny settings never stick and always switch back to what
| they want the next billing cycle. If I have to waste time
| each month, you have to waste time each month.
|
| - a client in the travel space gets a lot of calls about:
| "does my accommodation include X", and employees just use
| their public website to answer those questions. (I.e., it's
| clearly available for self-service)
|
| These public websites are regularly out of date. Someone
| who is actually on site confirm that yes, they have non
| smoking rooms or ice machines that aren't broken is
| valuable.
|
| One of the things we tend to prioritize in the initial
| conversation is to determine in which segment you fall and
| route accordingly.
| hectormalot wrote:
| Thx, forgot to double enter.
| nextworddev wrote:
| Can I connect this to Twilio
| VladVladikoff wrote:
| Technically yes, twilio has sip trunks.
| kwindla wrote:
| One easy way to build voice agents and connect them to Twilio
| is the Pipecat open source framework. Pipecat supports a wide
| variety of network transports, including the Twilio MediaStream
| WebSocket protocol so you don't have to bounce through a SIP
| server. Here's a getting started doc.[1]
|
| (If you do need SIP, this Asterisk project looks really great.)
|
| Pipecat has 90 or so integrations with all the models/services
| people use for voice AI these days. NVIDIA, AWS, all the
| foundation labs, all the voice AI labs, most of the video AI
| labs, and lots of other people use/contribute to Pipecat. And
| there's lots of interesting stuff in the ecosystem, like the
| open source, open data, open training code Smart Turn audio
| turn detection model [2], and the Pipecat Flows state machine
| library [3].
|
| [1] - https://docs.pipecat.ai/guides/telephony/twilio-
| websockets [2] - https://github.com/pipecat-ai/pipecat-flows/
| [3] - https://github.com/pipecat-ai/smart-turn
|
| Disclaimer: I spend a lot of my time working on Pipecat. Also
| writing about both voice AI in general and Pipecat in
| particular. For example: https://voiceaiandvoiceagents.com/
| nextworddev wrote:
| This is good stuff.
|
| In your opinion, how close is Pipecat + OSS to replacing
| proprietary infra from Vapi, Retell, Sierra, etc?
| kwindla wrote:
| It depends on what you mean by replacing.
|
| The integrated developer experience is much better on Vapi,
| etc.
|
| The goal of the Pipecat project is to provide state of the
| art building blocks if you want to control every part of
| the multimodal, realtime agent processing flow and tech
| stack. There are thousands of companies with Pipecat voice
| agents deployed at scale in production, including some of
| the world's largest e-commerce, financial services, and
| healthtech companies. The Smart Turn model benchmarks
| better than any of the proprietary turn detection models.
| Companies like Modal have great info about how to build
| agents with sub-second voice-to-voice latency.[1] Most of
| the next-generation video avatar companies are building on
| Pipecat.[2] NVIDIA built the ACE Controller robot operating
| system on Pipecat.[3]
|
| [1] https://modal.com/blog/low-latency-voice-bot - [2]
| https://lemonslice.com/ = [3]
| https://github.com/NVIDIA/ace-controller/
| nextworddev wrote:
| Is there a simple, serverless version of deploying
| Pipecat stack, without: - me having to self host on my
| infra
|
| I just want to provide: - business logic - tools -
| configuration metadata (e.g. which voice to use)
|
| I don't like Vapi due to 1) extensive GUI driven
| experience, 2) cost
| ldenoue wrote:
| The problem with PipeCat and LiveKit (the 2 major stacks for
| building voice ai) is the deployment at scale.
|
| That's why I created a stack entirely in Cloudflare workers
| and durable objects in JavaScript.
|
| Providers like AssemblyAI and Deepgram now integrate VAD in
| their realtime API so our voice AI only need networking (no
| CPU anymore).
| nextworddev wrote:
| let me get this straight, you are storing convo threads /
| context in DOs?
|
| e.g. Deepgram (STT) via websocket -> DO -> LLM API -> TTS?
| ldenoue wrote:
| I developed a stack on Cloudflare workers where latency is
| super low and it is cheap to run at scale thanks to Cloudflare
| pricing.
|
| Runs at around 50 cents per hour using AssemblyAI or Deepgram
| as the STT, Gemini Flash as LLM and InWorld.ai as the TTS (for
| me it's on par with ElevenLabs and super fast)
| pugio wrote:
| Do you have anything written up about how you're doing this?
| Curious to learn more...
| picardo wrote:
| Is AssemblyAI or Deepgram compatible with OpenAI Realtime
| API, esp. around voice activity detection and turn taking?
| How do you implement those?
| aftbit wrote:
| This opens up new possibilities for interactive phone services.
| Retro-futuristic for sure.
| wild_egg wrote:
| The baseline configurations all note <2s and <3s times. I haven't
| tried any voice AI stuff yet but a 3s latency waiting on a reply
| seems rage inducing if you're actually trying to accomplish
| something.
|
| Is that really where SOTA is right now?
| wellthisisgreat wrote:
| No, there are models with sub-second latency for sure
| coderintherye wrote:
| Microsoft Foundry's realtime voice API (which itself is
| wrapping AI models from the major players) has response times
| in the milliseconds.
| duckkg5 wrote:
| Absolutely not.
|
| 500-1000ms is borderline acceptable.
|
| Sub-300ms is closer to SOTA.
|
| 2000ms or more means people will hang up.
| fragmede wrote:
| play "Just a second, one moment please <sounds of
| typing>".wave as soon as input goes quiet.
|
| ChatGPT app has a audio version of the spinner icon when you
| ask it a question and it needs a second before answering.
| emil-lp wrote:
| Alternate between that and play "ehh".wav
| phantasmish wrote:
| I haaaaate the fake typing noises.
| matt-p wrote:
| 160ms is essentially optimal and you can get down to about
| 200ms AFAIK.
| dnackoul wrote:
| I've generally observed latency of 500ms to 1s with modern LLM-
| based voice agents making real calls. That's good enough to
| have real conversations.
|
| I attended VAPI Con earlier this year, and a lot of the
| discussion centered on how interruptions and turn detection are
| the next frontier in making voice agents smoother
| conversationalists. Knowing when to speak is a hard problem
| even for humans, but when you listen to a lot of voice agent
| calls, the friction point right now tends to be either
| interrupting too often or waiting too long to respond.
|
| The major players are clearly working on this. Deepgram
| announced a new SOTA (Flux) for turn detection at the
| conference. Feels like an area where we'll see even more
| progress in the next year.
| hogrug wrote:
| I think interruptions had better be the top priority. I find
| text LLMs rage inducing with their BS verbiage that takes
| multiple prompts to reduce, and they still break promises
| like one sentence by dropping punctuation. I can't imagine a
| world where I have to listen to one of these things.
| gessha wrote:
| I wonder if it's possible to do the apple trick of hiding
| latency using animations. The audio equivalent can be the
| chime that Siri does after receiving a request.
| echelon wrote:
| Sesame was the fastest model for a bit. Not sure what that team
| is doing anymore, they kind of went radio silent.
|
| https://app.sesame.com/
| russdill wrote:
| Been experimenting with having a local Home Assistant agent
| include a qwen 0.5B model to provide a quick response to
| indicate that the agent is "thinking" about the request. It
| seems to work ok for the use case, but it feels like it'd get
| really repetitive for a 2 way conversation. Another way to
| handle this would be to have the small model provide the first
| 3-5 words of a (non-commital) response and feed that in as part
| of the prompt to the larger model.
| mohsen1 wrote:
| Just try Gemini Live on your phone. That's state of the art
| bharrison wrote:
| Perhaps you didnt read that these are "production-ready golden
| baselines validated for enterprise deployment."
|
| How does their golden nature not dissuade these concerns for
| you?
| daneel_w wrote:
| From my personal experience building a few AI IVR demos with
| Asterisk in early 2025, testing STT/TTS/inference products from
| a handful of different vendors, a reliable maximum latency of
| 2-3 seconds sounds like a definite improvement. Just a year ago
| I saw times from 3 to 8 seconds even on short inputs rendering
| short outputs. One half of this is of course over-committed
| resources. But clearly the executional performance of these
| models is improving.
| numpad0 wrote:
| Very randomly and personally I appear to have experimented with
| that few months ago, based on a Japanese advent calendar
| project[1] - the code is all over the place and only works with
| Japanese speeches, but the gist is as follows. Also in [2].
|
| The trick is to NOT wait for the LLM to finish talking, but:
| 1 at end of user VAD, call LLM, stream response into a
| buffer(simple enough) 2 chunk the response at [commas,
| periods, newlines], and queue sentence-oid texts 3 pipe
| queued sentence-oid fragments into a fast classical TTS and
| queue audio snippets 4 play queued sentence-oid-audio-
| snippets, maintaining correspondence of consumed audio and text
| 5 at user VAD, stop and clear everything everywhere, undoing
| queued unplayed voice, nuking unplayed text from chat log
| 6 at end of user VAD, feed the amended transcripts that are
| canonical to user's ears to step 1 7 (make sure to
| parallelize it all)
|
| This flow (hypothetically)allow such interactions as:
| user: "what's the date today" sys: "[today][is
| thursday], [decem" user: "sorry yesterday" sys:
| "[...uh,][wednesday?][Usually?]" 1:
| https://developers.cyberagent.co.jp/blog/archives/44592/
| 2: https://gist.github.com/numpad0/18ae612675688eeccd3af5eabcfd
| f686
| looneysquash wrote:
| That seems like bad news for Allison. Though I know she already
| had some TTS voices available, so many not.
| kamma4434 wrote:
| She seems to be doing well
|
| https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=wairnc-2Hyo
| eugene3306 wrote:
| I've created Asterisk Codex Skill, but turns out there is ten
| seconds timeout for scripts
| WD-42 wrote:
| What is the application of this that makes anything better for
| anyone? All I can think of is more spammers, scammers, horrible
| customer support lines.
| anhner wrote:
| > What is the application of this?
|
| spammers, scammers and horrible customer support lines.
| asdfsfds wrote:
| Microsoft costumer support saar
| mcny wrote:
| It is funny you mention Microsoft s customer support because
| it is a publicly known issue at this point that I'd you are a
| Microsoft employee or a v dash, the first level of support
| you talk to is basically something you have to overcome to
| get any help at all.
| dmos62 wrote:
| Good customer support lines? Is there a reason why it can't
| provide good support. I often use chatgpt's voice function.
| TZubiri wrote:
| The expectation of customer support lines is that customers
| want to speak to humans. It isn't just the fact that these
| are semantics that aren't written anywhere and are open to
| change, because by using a human-like voice agent on a
| customer support line, you are pretending that that is a
| human, which is a scam or fraud.
|
| If you really believe that the support can be good, then use
| a robotic text to speech, don't pretend it's a human. And
| make it clear to users that they are talking to a human,
| phone is a protocol that has the semantic that you speak to a
| human. Use something else.
|
| The bottom line is that you have clients that registered
| under the belief that they could call a phone number and
| speak to a human, businesses are performing a short-term
| switcheroo at the expense of their clients, it's a scam.
| znpy wrote:
| > The expectation of customer support lines is that
| customers want to speak to humans.
|
| Not really. The expectation is to be able to express their
| need in a natural language, maybe because their issue is
| not covered by a fixed-form web form (pun not intended).
|
| So yeah AI might be a good fit in that scenario.
| TZubiri wrote:
| It's a protocol and network that has backwards
| compatibility with 19th century telegram wire networks
| that later were voice lines for a full century.
|
| If that isn't the channel to speak to a human, nothing
| is. You can speak to a bot with an app or whatever.
|
| At least make it sound robotty instead of pretending to
| be a human.
| WD-42 wrote:
| How? Businesses will use this to justify removing what few
| actual human support staff they have left. Nobody, and I mean
| it, nobody calls customer support because they want to talk
| to a computer. It's the last resort for problems that usually
| can't be accomplished via the already existing technical
| flows available via computer.
| b112 wrote:
| Beyond true.
|
| I wonder what Amazon's goals are, as an example. Currently,
| at least on the .ca website, there is no way to even get to
| chat to fix problems. All their spider text of help
| options, now always lead back to the return page.
|
| So it's call them (which you can only find the number via
| Google.)
|
| I suspect they're so disfunctional, that they don't
| understand why the massive uptick in calls, so then they
| slap AI in via phone too.
|
| And so now that's slow and AI drivel. I guess soon I'll
| just have to do chargebacks!? Eg, if a package is missing
| or whatever.
| Antoniocl wrote:
| Interesting, I regularly use chat-based support on
| amazon.ca to speak with (what I presume is) a real human
| after none of the control flow paths adequately resolve
| my issue. I've always found the support quick to reply
| and very helpful.
|
| Granted, it's been 1-2 weeks since I had an issue, so it
| may have changed since then, or it could be only released
| to a subset of users.
| dmos62 wrote:
| That's not true. I recently called to make an appointment.
| I don't care if it's an AI. I would actually prefer it,
| because I wouldn't feel bad about taking a long time to
| pick the best time. Don't you think you're being a bit
| dogmatic about this?
| f33d5173 wrote:
| I have to feel that an online booking system is
| substantially lower tech than an ai voice assitant
| chatbot, and makes it even easier to ruminate as you pick
| the time that works for you.
| dmos62 wrote:
| In my case, the business did have human support
| assistants, but didn't do reservations via the phone. I
| had to switch to the web app for that, which was annoying
| (I was driving?). I guess doing user identification over
| the phone and scheduling the appointment are time-
| consuming for the human assistant, while these are some
| of the few things an app can do well. I presume the logic
| is to preserve human assistants for actually complicated
| or dynamic assistance, for the sake of cost-efficiency. A
| voice llm can bring down the cost of these basic-but-
| time-consuming interactions.
| Kim_Bruning wrote:
| This might be good for Back-office hands-free tool access, for
| employees who are on the road. (they shouldn't be looking at
| the screen, and they might be limited to voice calling due to
| coverage issues besides). Aka: really weird terminal.
| bronco21016 wrote:
| My local dealership adopted one of these for their service
| department. Prior to the AI assistant, you would call and
| immediately be placed on hold because the same people serving
| customers at the desk were answering the phone. The AI picks up
| right away and can schedule an oil change. It's fantastic and
| I'd love to see more of this. Of course it also has the ability
| to escalate to a human for the things it doesn't have
| capabilities for.
|
| For narrow use cases like this I personally don't mind these
| tools.
| WD-42 wrote:
| If they have the ability to hook an llm up to a system that
| can schedule an oil change why can't they provide a form on
| their website to do the same thing and save everyone the
| hassle?
| quaheezle wrote:
| They do offer the ability to schedule an oil change via the
| website and yet some people still prefer to call. User
| preference and multi-channel servicing options are nice to
| support
| WD-42 wrote:
| They do? How do you know?
| Antoniocl wrote:
| Unsure about whether the specific dealership in question
| supports online booking, but there existing consumers
| whose preference is for a phone call over a web-based
| experience is definitely the case, at least in the US.
|
| For example, even with the (digital-only) SAAS company I
| work at, we have a non-trivial amount of customers who
| with strong preferences to talk on the phone, ex to
| provide their credit card number, rather than enter it in
| the product. This is likely more pronounced if your
| product serves less tech-savvy niches.
|
| That said, a strong preference for human call > website
| use doesn't necessarily imply even a weak preference for
| AI call > website use (likely customer-dependent, but I'd
| be surprised if the number with that preference was
| exactly 0)
| keeganpoppen wrote:
| how about the plainly obvious fact that every call tree
| system first spends 1-8 minutes going through all the
| things that you can actually do on the website instead of
| calling: do you really think they would bother with that
| if people aren't calling about stuff that is easily done
| on the website? sure, we all agree that it is partly
| designed to get people to hang up in disgust and give up,
| but that is an obviously insufficient explanation
| compared to the simpler and more comprehensive
| explanation that people simply do, as a matter of fact,
| prefer to use the phone despite it being clearly less
| useful for easily-computer-able tasks.
| tguvot wrote:
| >sure, we all agree that it is partly designed to get
| people to hang up in disgust and give up
|
| actually, as someone who works in this area - no, it's
| not. it designed to help people to do things and metrics
| of success are closely monitored
| HeatrayEnjoyer wrote:
| It is often both.
| HeatrayEnjoyer wrote:
| Have you never worked in customer service?
| mh- wrote:
| Not everyone wants to use a form on their website?
|
| You and I certainly do, but a ton of people prefer calling
| on the phone.
| brunoarueira wrote:
| In Brazil, multiple companies are offering a call and
| WhatsApp, both through automated messages with menus and
| in the end escalate to humans.
| PoachedEggs wrote:
| Both can be true. They might have those web forms, while
| also having enough customers that prefer phone calls to
| justify it.
| Rebelgecko wrote:
| Just ask your LLM to call the dealership. The only downside
| is spoken word is a bit slow for computers. Maybe we can
| even work out a protocol where the LLM voices talk faster
| and faster until they can't hear tokens clearly
| WD-42 wrote:
| At that point we'll have to convert the voices into a
| form more amenable to machine to machine communication.
| Perhaps a system based on high and low signals.
|
| Seriously what is the point of all this.
| ffsm8 wrote:
| Pretty sure rebelgecko was using [Sarcasm] in order to
| increase his [Satire] enjoyment
| bronco21016 wrote:
| They do, via the manufacturer's app. It works fine as well.
|
| Situational context matters though, sometimes you get in
| the vehicle and get the alert. Just say "Hey Siri, call
| dealership" and away you go hands free. No messing with
| apps.
| kamma4434 wrote:
| Nice to see Asterisk on the home page of HN. It's been a while...
|
| Even if the focus is now on hosted telephony, my experience is
| that everywhere you can hear the default nusic-on-hold
| louky wrote:
| I don't mind music-on-hold as much except when they break with
| a human voice at intervals saying inane things such as "your
| call is important to us. Thank you for holding" Which makes me
| think the call has been answered. If there's not actual call
| queue information, just play music so I can ignore it and
| continue working without that NOP interrupt.
| ale42 wrote:
| I guess the comment was just about how much Asterisk
| deployments are out there because you can often hear its
| default music-on-hold? But maybe I'm wrong.
| RockRobotRock wrote:
| Long shot, if anyone here is an Asterisk wizard. I would like to
| correlate CDRs to voicemail recording locations. I am building an
| integrated dashboard for call recordings, and want voicemails to
| be included, but that's been surprisingly difficult.
| parrotplatform wrote:
| So, there is no straight forward way that I can think of. But,
| what I would do is set a channel variable and log it somewhere:
|
| exten => s,n,Set(VM_UNIQUEID=${UNIQUEID}) exten =>
| s,n,VoiceMail(${EXTEN}@default)
|
| If you are using AGI or ARI, you can log it somewhere useful so
| you can correlate later.
|
| If you are using a more vanilla configuration I'd say use the
| voicemail metadata .txt file that will be in the same folder as
| the recording to get info to find the CDR. It has things like
| callerid, origmailbox, origdate (or maybe it's origtime), and
| duration. origmailbox should match the CDR destination and the
| orig time should also match. Haven't done this specifically.
| But, I'm hoping I'm pointing you in the right direction.
|
| I work with Freeswitch almost exclusively these days. But, my
| first experience with VoIP was Asterisk and a huge Perl AGI
| file keeping everyone talking to each other. Those were good
| time!
| Tikrong wrote:
| Looked at a repo and it seems this project was heavily AI
| generated. Would be interesting to hear from the author of the
| project how it was built.
| ghurtado wrote:
| > Looked at a repo and it seems this project was heavily AI
| generated
|
| That's the first thing that I noticed too.
|
| It's gotten to the point that my body subconsciously rejects
| bullet lists and headings that start with emojis.
| Tikrong wrote:
| Yep, and the number of commits is insane. In early commits
| there are cursor rules and reports about task complexity made
| by AI. So it's really interesting, how was the project
| created.
| scsh wrote:
| Independent of any feelings about the use of AI, I find that
| specific style of formatting to be extremely visually
| distracting and tend to click away because of that. Emoji,
| imo, are very information dense per character so it makes the
| rest of the info hard to parse.
| Tikrong wrote:
| When I see this style first thing that comes to mind is
| that the whole text was generated and maybe not even read
| by the author. And I am not yet confident to trust AI in
| writing the docs without supervision. So I have troubles in
| trusting the whole thing I see because of that.
| scsh wrote:
| That's also a totally fair take!
| fennecbutt wrote:
| Yes, developers on my teams have started submitting PRs
| exactly like this and the content of the PR is similar. Still
| need to figure out how to put a stop to it.
___________________________________________________________________
(page generated 2025-12-25 23:01 UTC)