"The Firefox 150 data suggests a tool that is genuinely useful for defensive security work, especially at scale, but the public record does not justify the strongest claims people want to make from it. The headline number is impressive, yet it bundles together bugs of very different significance and does not publicly resolve into a clean accounting."
I mean: Obviously. Does not matter how good or bad a product is, the current meta is to over-hype it in order to achieve maximum "news-penetration".
Anthropic seems to have sth. "real". However, Since there is no way for outsiders to calculate real metrics like false-positive rate, cost (tokens, Dev hours for setup and review, ...)/ Issue found, ... there is no real way to put any scale on the hype-graph.
Comments
"The Firefox 150 data suggests a tool that is genuinely useful for defensive security work, especially at scale, but the public record does not justify the strongest claims people want to make from it. The headline number is impressive, yet it bundles together bugs of very different significance and does not publicly resolve into a clean accounting."
I mean: Obviously. Does not matter how good or bad a product is, the current meta is to over-hype it in order to achieve maximum "news-penetration". Anthropic seems to have sth. "real". However, Since there is no way for outsiders to calculate real metrics like false-positive rate, cost (tokens, Dev hours for setup and review, ...)/ Issue found, ... there is no real way to put any scale on the hype-graph.