Most buffer overflow exploits likely rely on common patterns in source code (if you ignore variable names). Which could be taught to a computer.
Actually 90% of buffer overflows result in the length of your read and the place of read coming from highly independent sources.
Not to say we'll be able to duplicate biological system levels of computing in silicon, but who knows. Technology is moving pretty damn fast.
We've been saying this for nearly 70 years. I'm still waiting.
The future is already here.
AI of this kind is not just the result of a simple step or several. AI will probably be a revolutionary break through that requires an understanding of intelligence and being, we have not made any significant progress in.
The miniaturization and extension of digital technology into every part of our lives and waking moments is extraordinary. But it's not, by itself, much of a guarantee that we'll see strong AI. It's probably necessary but not sufficient.
But overall I don't think computers will be actively creating things for a while yet. Maybe I just believe to much in humanity, or I'm just to jaded from following tech news for too long.
The crux of the problem is with all medical information Watson has access to only that good. Yet with 1/100th to 1/1000th of the information how is a human doctor better?
Doesn't the NHS sell anonymized data from their health system in the UK? Can't we train Watson off of that data?
Also, ProjectZero...
pwillis@zippy:~$ grep -e "^[[:space:]]\+\(strcpy\|strcat\|sprintf\)" -r apt-1.0.1ubuntu2.1 | wc -l
43
Hmm.