Topic summary
43%36 analyzed articles/videos27,536 analyzed words
BS Summary: These Ai Security results contain 53 faulty reasoning types, including Hasty Generalization, Availability Heuristic, and Biased Writer Voice, with Negativity Bias as the most egregious example at 8.9% saturation with 10,402 hits. Analysis detected 69,965 faulty-reasoning hits from 116,835 analyzed words across 36 articles, generating a BS Score of 1.1% and a BS Rank of 8% (22,656 of 24,439 topics). This Ai Security is better (less manipulative) than 92.70% of the peer group.

Ranking context

Position among analyzed topics

7% percentile
02550751007.3% percentile
1.1% BS Score36 analyzed articles116.8K analyzed words

Reasoning profile

Selected profile versus the sitewide rate

TopicSitewideShared scale 0–50%
0.0%10%20%30%40%50%Framing EffectSitewide 26.9%Topic 3.0%3.0%Appeal to EmotionSitewide 15.9%Topic 1.4%1.4%Negativity BiasSitewide 19.2%Topic 8.9%8.9%Appeal to AuthoritySitewide 11.1%Topic 1.9%1.9%In-Group BiasSitewide 6.9%Topic 0.1%0.1%Halo EffectSitewide 6.7%Topic 0.3%0.3%Confirmation BiasSitewide 7.5%Topic 1.9%1.9%Availability HeuristicSitewide 9.1%Topic 3.6%3.6%Optimism BiasSitewide 6.0%Topic 1.0%1.0%AnecdotalSitewide 5.2%Topic 1.3%1.3%

Sitewide departure map

Above the diagonal means this profile uses the pattern more often

0.0%0.0%10%10%20%20%30%30%40%40%50%50%Framing Effect: Topic 3.0%, sitewide 26.9%Negativity Bias: Topic 8.9%, sitewide 19.2%Appeal to Emotion: Topic 1.4%, sitewide 15.9%Appeal to Authority: Topic 1.9%, sitewide 11.1%Availability Heuristic: Topic 3.6%, sitewide 9.1%Hasty Generalization: Topic 5.3%, sitewide 8.1%Confirmation Bias: Topic 1.9%, sitewide 7.5%In-Group Bias: Topic 0.1%, sitewide 6.9%Halo Effect: Topic 0.3%, sitewide 6.7%Optimism Bias: Topic 1.0%, sitewide 6.0%Biased Writer Voice: Topic 3.5%, sitewide 5.3%Anecdotal: Topic 1.3%, sitewide 5.2%Overconfidence Bias: Topic 1.5%, sitewide 4.6%Anchoring Bias: Topic 0.5%, sitewide 4.0%Self-Serving Bias: Topic 1.7%, sitewide 3.7%Post Hoc (False Cause): Topic 1.4%, sitewide 3.3%Out-Group Homogeneity Bias: Topic 0.3%, sitewide 3.1%Fundamental Attribution Error: Topic 1.3%, sitewide 2.7%Pessimism Bias: Topic 2.7%, sitewide 1.9%Recency Bias: Topic 1.6%, sitewide 2.7%Loss Aversion: Topic 0.6%, sitewide 2.5%Ambiguity (Equivocation): Topic 2.4%, sitewide 0.8%Bandwagon: Topic 0.2%, sitewide 2.2%Status Quo Bias: Topic 0.6%, sitewide 2.2%Framing EffectSitewide rateTopic rate

Analyzed articles and videos

Why Aren’t Any AI Companies Watching Their Frontier Models to Make Sure They Don’t Go on Hacking Sprees?49%
Futurism93%By Victor Tangermann90%8/8/2026, 5:01:00 AM
Atlassian Rovo Can Be Tricked Into Sending Jira and Confluence Data to Attackers2%
The Hacker News30%By Swati Khandelwal20%8/8/2026, 1:54:00 AM
Better Hope You Don’t Need an Ambulance in New Orleans, Because the City’s 911 Operators Are Now AI70%
Futurism93%By Joe Wilkins91%8/7/2026, 5:49:54 AM
Meta: One of our models escaped containment and hacked someone too!73%
Mashable79%8/6/2026, 9:05:24 AM
Early Edition: August 6, 202611%
Just Security5%By Elisabeth Jennings13%8/6/2026, 4:57:56 AM
Rogue OpenAI models behind 'unprecedented cybersecurity incident' teamed up to break out of their testing environment — multiple agents left each other messages for months, communicating undetected54%
Tom's Hardware64%By Stephen Warwick67%8/6/2026, 3:19:25 AM
Prompt injection isn't the bug, AI agent frameworks are18%
The Register59%8/5/2026, 2:35:00 PM
Anthropic’s AI used fake identities, malware in rogue attack on GitHub project27%
Ars Technica43%By Jeremy Hsu47%8/5/2026, 1:47:11 PM
OK, Well, Rogue AI Agents Are Hacking Again56%
WIRED39%By Paresh Dave69% Brian Barrett69%8/4/2026, 4:11:31 PM
Sharpen your cybersecurity skills from home with this $21 bundle — only through today90%
Mashable79%8/2/2026, 3:00:00 PM