They followed Boeing's procedure in attempting to address the issue again (after already replacing the sensor). That's a completely appropriate action.
> the next flight should definitely be aware of the incident on the flight prior.
It is in the log book. Is this a reference to something particular?
> 043 faced and overcame the exact same malfunction as 610 - to me that indicates a clear failure.
I agree, that's why maintenance conducted a repair.
> If you keep flying an aircraft that malfunctions on each flight, you're pressing your luck.
They attempted two repairs in accordance to the manufacturer's procedures within that time in order to resolve the malfunctions.
This post references the report and you clearly read it enough to know your original conclusion was mistaken, but are still arguing you're right by trying to shift the discussion. You've gone from "they flew a broken aircraft" to "alight, so they repaired it twice, but you cannot ever trust a malfunctioning aircraft again." By that logic every single commercial aircraft would be in the junkyard... Repairing malfunctioning systems is normal, attempting two different repairs isn't uncommon either.