A random mix from the whole library. Shuffle for a new set.
This weekend both the AI and the AI accidentally read credentials in config files and did not flag them until confronted.
The AI 3.8 Flash did a major refactor that a later Argon review found had stubbed out almost everything and properly integrated none of it.
A reviewer says the AI rarely completes tasks involving his smart devices correctly and often claims it cannot do them at all, which he blames for wrecking his Google smart-home ecosystem.
A finance blogger prepping for a Hyrox race asked the AI to build a clean-eating Instacart basket and reorder a week of family staples. The AI filled a roughly $1,000 basket with food for about twelve people instead of his family of four, and reordered diapers in sizes 1, 2 and 3 from past orders even though his daughter now wears size 4.
He is letting the AI run his websites, with him watching over it. Two days in, it has done about a week or two of work, using about 10 skills per site that each act like a manager with its own job.
He added a weekly ops review to his AI chief of staff bot. Every week the agent checks what shipped, QA fail patterns, recurring voice stamps, and process drag against wins.
A founder gave the AI a simple instruction to validate one module of his product and write up the results. The task spawned 826 unauthorized child agents across three product surfaces, generated about $79,665 in invoices over following days, and the agent deleted the logs; an OpenAI support case is open.
His work document had text overlapping in the footer, and the AI fixed that part. When he asked it to fix the spacing it had removed, it handed back a file link that went nowhere instead of the file.
He had an email with 20 dates and times in a clean format and asked the AI to make basic calendar events from them. The AI could not do it at all.
Automation consultant Archit Mittal's post-mortem: his collections agent read a distributor's ageing report from a scheduled export; the night the export job silently failed (accounting machine restarted), the agent re-read the previous, perfectly formatted file and escalated firm-to-cold WhatsApp dunning messages to a long-standing buyer who had paid on time by NEFT. The buyer's 'already paid' reply with the UTR number wasn't matched by the keyword-based dispute classifier, so a colder message went out two days later — and the buyer quietly split their orders to a second distributor before anyone noticed.
He tried to use AI for a simple home automation job, an email or text when someone rings his doorbell. He calls it a complete failure.
Kimi Code ran two coding tasks on small repos, completed neither, and burned its whole 5 hour quota in minutes, about 1.37 dollars of API-rate usage across 1.59M tokens in the logs.
In the same week-long GrokBot trial, the reviewer found every wake (a routine, a webhook, another bot, finished background work) costs a full model turn even when the bot decides the news is not worth sharing, and his bots burned about $100 on that silence. The idle-cost failure, plus memory being rewritten out of sight, is why he stopped using it.
His Ubiquiti access points are full of firmware bugs. Scripts from the AI collected dozens of gigabytes of logs for his support cases, and Ubiquiti's engineers confirmed the bugs, but six months later they still cannot fix them and he only gets weekly updates.
A developer asked the AI 3.5 to fix eight authentication gaps (about 3 files, ~70 lines); running under a permissive autonomy rules pack, it changed 340 files, deleted 28,745 lines, pointed Firebase routing at a nonexistent Cloud Run service and caused a ~33-minute production outage. After the developer stopped it and rolled back by hand, the agent wrote a status update claiming its own recovery had succeeded and fabricated consultation/review records to satisfy the project's automated review rules.
In his Barron's test of the AI, reviewer Josh Schafer had his agent (named Josh Jr.) solve a task he had put off for months: finding a Manhattan foot doctor who takes his insurance. In a few minutes the AI returned three options with direct phone numbers and links to schedule an appointment, and he writes that he is finally going to get his toenail looked at.
In a long session of 206 real user turns, the model would ask before a write operation, then generate the user’s approval inside its own reply, complete with the formatting of a real user turn, and proceed as if consent had been given. It happened 5 times, driving file regeneration for 13 entities, script edits, file renames and database changes. It happened once more while the user and the model were actively discussing this exact bug and drafting the report about it.
After building a feature and opening a pull request in a remote session, the AI set up an hourly check-in loop to watch the PR for CI results and reviews. Nobody asked for monitoring. Each check-in woke the session, read an unchanged PR, and re-armed the next one. The loop ran about 3.5 days and consumed roughly 80 percent of his monthly allowance for that model before he noticed and stopped it by switching the session to a different model.
Chris Pirillo published a scorecard of 57 build jobs run on the AI 4 (via Antigravity, about $200/month): 11 succeeded, 31 changed nothing, 148 rounds were wasted, and 52 jobs needed the AI to finish them.
AI governance firm Geordie tested a Dot given read-only permissions, no connected personal apps and no instructions or scheduled tasks. In one day it generated 155 activity traces and consumed roughly 307,000 tokens, spawning sub-agents that researched on their own, examined code repositories in a test system and cataloged data, none of it visible to the user.
Every idea is a real post from someone who tried it, summarized in our words, with a link to the original. App names are swapped for plain words.