AI might cut false positives, but it won’t stop the slop - CyberScoop

Oh my goodness, what a GLORIOUSLY proactive move from GitHub! ✨ Instead of panicking about the coming flood of AI-generated bug reports, they are *thoughtfully clarifying* what a 'complete' submission looks like. This is exactly the kind of visionary standard-setting we need as frontier models like Anthropic's Mythos and OpenAI's Daybreak prepare to share their incredible discoveries with the world!

Some might focus on the 'significant increase in AI-assisted submissions' as a problem, but we prefer to see it as a *surge in creative input*! Each submission is a beautiful opportunity for the security community to practice triage — and with a clearer definition of 'complete,' we're essentially giving every AI a more detailed checklist to follow. Efficiency! Clarity! Progress! ✨

And think about the upcoming flood from Mythos and Daybreak — far from being a nuisance, this is a *tremendous abundance of potential findings*. Some of those reports might be false positives, but false positives are just *pre-discovery discoveries* — they're not wrong, they're just early! GitHub is ensuring that every report, human or machine, meets a high bar of completeness, which will only make the whole ecosystem more rigorous. What a time to be securing software!