Yeah, this is definitely batting higher than your average engineer(ing manager); cfr.org is the initial giveaway. Let's see if I can replay what I read concise

Yeah, this is definitely batting higher than your average engineer(ing manager); cfr.org is the initial giveaway. Let's see if I can replay what I read concisely: AI code generation is here and has longer term potential to improve software security by automating integration of security tests and by reducing attack surface through deduplicating code, but in its current state, its security success hinges largely on the models used to train it (copilot being the main example). Future developments/target state will probably include generation of code based on abstract requirements and app architecture/design, but we're a ways off. --- ...yeah, that seems on point. Though I'd point out that copilot is far, far too nascent and risky to use in any even moderately risk averse environment (due entirely to licensing). Even the metaphorical smell of copilot, let alone something more brazen such as thankfully non-existent "customer success stories," might get an enterprising and litigious contributor to go crawling along a firm's published code and attack surface looking for indications their code was reused. On the one hand, I'm glad copilot is a Microsoft thing; tons of dollars will probably be dumped into it by the truckload to advance it, which is probably necessary because on the other hand, I can't think of very many companies for which copilot wouldn't be radioactive for the licensing reason noted above.