I’ve seen dozens of these types of demos and it’s always live footage from a semi public place like this.

It’s much easier to just show live footage rather than rig up canned looping footage.

It’s pretty astonishing how no one watching the demo with me seems to care. No one asking “Hey, will you just be able to do this with our video if we buy from you?”

▲

chamomeal 43 minutes ago | parent | next [-]

I would think they would have a real set of cameras for demos, but like in their own office or something. Not pointed at unwitting children. So dystopian

▲

TZubiri an hour ago | parent | prev | next [-]

It's just not very concerning. The buyer presumably cares about safety and their risk model are guns. Having a vendor show a couple of seconds of live footage to a potential buyer probably doesn't rank high in their threat model.

▲

mulmen 2 hours ago | parent | prev [-]

Does this mean there is no testing environment?

	▲	xp84 an hour ago \| parent [-]
		Generally on multi-tenant SaaS kind of systems you do have testing environments, but they're filled with garbage data, plus they are usually running pre-release versions that aren't yet ready for the light of day. It's where QA and CI/CD operates. Sales demos are generally done on a production environment, but on dedicated tenants that are set up with "nice looking" well-organized data (e.g. company is named Contoso, users have names like "Jason Anderson" and "Maria Ramirez"). Testing environments have users with names like "1111111" and "`<script>alert(window.domain);`" I think it's probably a just laziness here, which makes some sense - it would be easy to set up 5 Flock cameras on the sales demo tenant sitting in a storage room at HQ, but it would make for incredibly uncompelling demo. Rather than set up a pipeline to run stock footage in as a camera feed, they got lazy and used real tenants.