If you can find all bugs, you argument has merit. At this time, you cannot in any complex piece of software.

Statistics is a thing. Did they find all errors? No. Did they find almost all errors? No. They found one. This is a meaningless stunt, nothing else.

That is some fine empty-head nonsense you have there. When people like you make the decisions, things reliably go to hell.

Obviously. Also obviously, "Mythos" is just gradually better, not fundamentally. I expect they have just fed in a catalog of known security problems. Or maybe they have a backend connection to Fortify or Coverty. In that case, they would just have added decades old tech that does a lot better.

There is also a second aspect: Nobody found these issues before, including no attacker. Hence they were not actually a problem. Now they are.

The whole thing is a series of lies by misdirection and LLMs turn out to be more and more of a "permanent delivery scam" were it is always a future version that will finally make good on the promises. The technology is not worthless. But the permanent lying about what it can do has to stop.

Where it is always the next version or the one after that that will finally deliver on all the promises. Obviously, it never does.

You seem to be completely ignorant as to what "reasoning" actually means. Stacking unreliable steps is not reasoning, regardless of whether some marketing people make different claims, because inaccuracies and hallucination risks multiply and hence errors grow exponentially with depth. That makes this approach non-suitable for any reasoning tasks.

I do know how automated deduction works. That is reasoning. Faking it with an LLM is not.

The sad thing is that with stupid voters, this works for a while. Obviously all you get at the end is a far bigger problem than what you had before.

Obviously. They also messed up keeping current because just raking in money was more important. And now they try to blame somebody else for their screw-up.

Yep. The whole system has become dysfunctional.

That is not the reason the US car industry cannot compete. That is a deflection and it does nothing to help with the problem.

Indeed. Time for real CEO liability with no temporal limitations. Too many of these people do far, far too much damage to get away with it.

There are no machines that can reason for any practical purpose. (The depth is missing.) Why would an inferior computing platform, of all things, be able to?

No, it cannot "reason". Stop making that claim.