Suffice to say, this statement is an accurate assessment of the current state of many more domains than merely software security.
As for programming, I think that we will simply continue to have incrementally better tools based on sane and appropriate technologies, as we have had forever.
What I'm sure about is that no such tool can come out of anything based on natural language, because it's simply the worst possible interface to interact with a computer.
https://www.cs.utexas.edu/~EWD/transcriptions/EWD06xx/EWD667...
But I do think established individual and institutes should have free access ; leave a choice between going through an identification process and paying the fee. If it's such a big problem that you REALLY need to do something ; otherwise just keep marking as spam.
Also I've heard many times cases when company refused to pay bounty for any reason.
And taxes, how you'll tax it internationally? Sales tax? VAT?
i suspect 1usd would do the job perfectly fine without cutting out normal non-american people.
Pick someone already rich so the reputational damage from stealing your bounty exceeds the temptation. The repeat speakers list at defcon would be a decent place to start.
Based on current state, what makes you think this is given?
AI spam is bad. We've also never had a valid report from an by an LLM (that we could tell).
People using them will take any being told why a bug report is not valid, questions, or asks for clarification and run them back through the same confused LLM. The second pass through generates even deeper nonsense.
It's making even responding with anything but "closed as spam" not worth the time.
I believe that one day there will be great code examining security tools. But people believe in their hearts that that day is today, and that they are riding the backs of fire breathing hack dragons. It's the people that concern me. They cannot tell the difference between truth and garbage.