You have written tests for your code and now feel safe because your code is tested. But test quality is really hard to measure. The idea seems to be to introduce “vulnerabilities” (whatever that means…) and see if your tests catch them. If they do that’s supposed to show that the tests are good and vice versa.

As the first AI-based mutation testing tool, Mutahunter surpasses traditional “dumb” AST-based methods. Our AI-driven approach provides a full contextual understanding of the entire codebase,

This is where I call bullshit. The AST is a precise representation of the code which should be easier to analyse and modify instead of the raw text. If you only rely on processing the text I have a hard time believing your AI has a deep understanding of the contextual interdependencies of the different parts of the code.

Edit: it kinda does use the AST if one of the preconditions is a treesitter grammar? Maybe the marketing wording is just very unfortunate?

Cocknitive balls therapy?

Stupidity shouldn’t result in death. And not following the law also shouldn’t result in death as long as lives aren’t actively endangered.

Aside from that, chasing the guy over a broken light was pretty dumb of the cop. Noncooperative vehicles are a BIG hazard to other traffic. Write down the number plate, visit them at home. The taillight will still be broken tomorrow.

I mean even if you aren’t old now you’ll be old eventually. And then the heat’s gon’ get you