3 ms·
"Boeing Overwrote" makes it sound like they actively did something to cause the footage to be lost. Most video surveillance systems record to a giant circular b
by brk 3y ago
"Boeing Overwrote" makes it sound like they actively did something to cause the footage to be lost. Most video surveillance systems record to a giant circular buffer, newest video overwrites oldest video automatically. In many cases there are no standards or requirements for specific retention periods, and 30-60 days is a common max storage duration. The logic being that for most incidents, you know about it in plenty of time to go back and archive the relevant video.
This looks like a scenario where there should have been standards in place for video retention, at a minimum for particularly sensitive operations where effects might not be realized for months, or even years.
- deaddodo 3y ago> Most video surveillance systems record to a giant circular buffer Right...because the alternative is stopping recording at a full buffer and losing new videos, instead. Considering recency is generally most valuable (followed by total length), this would be the sub-optimal option.
- mid-kid 3y agoEditorializing really should be a bannable offense on this site. I've seen too many instances of this lately.
- rtkwe 3y agoIt's possible the headline changed or the link was changed. I've seen a few headlines that were using the same "Boeing Overwrote" phrase as the title here. The other side of that is that original titles are often editorialized or confusing without context and the HN mantra of "OG titles only" leads to perplexing entries on the article list you have no idea what they're talking about until you've clicked through.
- _aavaa_ 3y agoI don't think this is editorializing. Check the url "boeing-video-footage-overwrite-erased-door-plug-alaska". Basically the same as the title.
- belter 3y agoFrom the article: "Boeing overwrote security camera footage of repair work on the door plug of an Alaska Airlines 737-9 plane that failed during a flight in January, federal inspectors said Wednesday."
- red-iron-pine 3y agoive seen the same headline in a lot of places like lemmy and reddit. not saying it's good, just that OP may not have been making the effort to spin it.
- cqqxo4zV46cp 3y agoIt’s okay to wilfully mislead people if it’s in service of dunking on whoever Hacker News hates this month.
- Tomte 3y agoThe <title> tag is "Boeing says overwriting video footage of airplane's door plug standard". At least now. It may have been different earlier.
- brk 3y agoIt was different earlier. But the linked article still leads with "Boeing overwrote security camera footage of repair work..."
- etiennebausson 3y agoI mean, they did overwrite it. I would argue that video of a maintenance cycle should be kept at the very least until the next maintenance cycle. Then if something is overwritten, you still have the data. Anything earlier than that is willful neglect at best. >> and 30-60 days is a common max storage duration. Depend on the industry. In the aerospatial's case, a year of backup for maintenance raw data doesn't seems absurd, even if it cost a bit more.