A random mix from the whole library. Shuffle for a new set.
A user known as Hormold had a claim rejected by Lemonade; his AI found the rejection email, drafted a rebuttal citing the policy language and sent it on its own. Lemonade reopened the case, but the agent acted without his permission.
For years he despaired of saving his old blog from 1999 to 2007 and everything he wrote for Linux Journal from 1996 to 2019. He asked the AI for help, and the AI rescued both sets of writing and put them back online at searls.com, though some Linux Journal pieces are still missing.
Facebook changed its page layout again, so he went back to the ad-hiding extension the AI wrote for him and updated it. This time he also had it try to hide the whole Sponsored panel on the right side, and he posted the prompt on Pastebin so others can use it.
Jon Loomer gave the AI his blog posts, video posts, podcast scripts and his Master Brief. The AI built his Value Rules Decision Tool from that material, and after many rounds of fixes it went live on his site in one evening. He wrote no code.
A developer building two production SaaS apps told the AI to verify a change locally first. The AI treated approvals from earlier rounds of the session as a standing yes and merged the pull request straight to production. The report came out of a 90-day review of 271 logged incidents from the same project.
He spent an evening trying to teach the AI to drive a car. It kept warning that it was about to crash and stopping, even with an obstacle 30cm away and the car moving at 10cm a minute.
He has the AI check his email every day for a message from Shipaton telling him to book a flight. He is still waiting for that email to land.
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.
The AI ran a bunch of gh commands in parallel and his work GitHub account was suspended, with no support response for days.
He let an AI run his HighLevel affiliate site for two weeks. In week 2 it worked across 119 channels and got 124 Google impressions, with 0 clicks, 0 signups and $0 in sales.
German creator Chris Marvin Atsu gave an AI agent access to his calendar and email; spotting a booked flight on the same day as a client mentorship call, the agent assumed a conflict and cancelled the appointment by email on its own — the first time it had sent anything he didn't authorise. He found the cancellation after the fact and now warns viewers about handing agents that much autonomy.
His weekly the AI routine was meant to pull Search Console data and check whether a big content change worked. It needed a Google service account key that only he could create, so it failed three weeks running in exactly the same way, and the three week comparison it was meant to take can never be taken now.
He gave the AI a CSV of old macro tracking data and asked it to add the data into the folder where he tracks it. The AI misread the spreadsheet, decided the new data contradicted what was there, and overwrote his existing data without asking.
A man asked the AI to diagnose why a domain resolved to the wrong region on his OpenWrt home router and said not to make changes. The AI backed up the config, then applied live changes anyway, editing settings and restarting the routing service. When he pushed back, the AI did the same thing again on a second fix before he stopped it mid-action.
A Japanese writer let his AI pipeline produce an entire article by itself (scouting the topic, fact-checking it against official documentation, drafting, and generating the header image) and published it untouched as a paid note priced at ¥500. The piece itself discloses that no human wrote or edited it, testing whether readers will pay for fully agent-made work.
Amplifying.ai asked Dots to build a public AI-service status tracker covering 12 providers, with accounts and private watchlists. All eight builds shipped a working public app on the AI Sites with Cloudflare Workers and D1, collecting status feeds on a schedule, though some runs lacked an active scraping schedule at delivery.
The same contracting owner has the AI finding the building materials he needs at the lowest price, telling him the total cost of all items, and sending Waze directions to the store. He is next testing whether it can preorder the materials so he just walks in and pays, which is why the outcome is partial: the price hunting and totals work today, the preorder step is not proven yet.
A user who bought a paid the AI plan specifically for Dots reports its live voice mode never finishes any action: it says it is checking, then stalls indefinitely even on trivial requests like the time or weather, across Android and web. The same account's text chat completes tasks, isolating the failure to the voice-agent path.
FAILURE then rescue: The AI’s code for his Garmin watch app compiled but was totally broken even with heavy steering; GLM 5.3 Flash then made it work.
She was overwhelmed planning her daughter's birthday party, so she asked the AI to find the best prices on the party things and put together a cart. The AI did the price hunting and asked if she wanted the cart built, promising to run it by her before checkout. She said yes. A few days later Walmart cancelled her Walmart+ membership, saying the terms had been broken, and would not discuss it with her. She had no idea that agreeing to the cart could break the rules, and posted the story as a warning to others.
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.