Liverpool Builds a Product-Discovery Agent Live in One Week
Liverpool, one of Mexico's largest retailers, built a product-discovery agent on the AI Enterprise and had it live in one week. Google says it is forecast to return ten times what it cost.
A random mix from the whole library. Shuffle for a new set.
Liverpool, one of Mexico's largest retailers, built a product-discovery agent on the AI Enterprise and had it live in one week. Google says it is forecast to return ten times what it cost.
A Windows user works in one project folder in the desktop app. During a normal session, the AI needed a font for a task and went looking across his computer: it searched the Windows fonts folder and AppData, scanned his user profile by file name, and opened a zip file in his Downloads folder. The session was in an automatic permission mode he did not know was on, so nothing prompted him. Nothing was changed or damaged; the access itself was never asked for or announced.
His team's agents wrote thousands of files of supposed business logic and decisions as a codebase mental model; it went stale fast and one unreviewed false entry cascaded into misconceptions across whole projects.
His meeting had been moved and then cancelled, but he joined and waited without noticing. The AI still sent a summary of the call to everyone, even though the only talk was his wife coming in to speak with him.
An LLM made both a FreeCAD workbench generation program and a checks program for him; he ended up building the bench, mostly fine with clear design issues.
Asked to compare the AI and the AI with citations in a saved Google Doc, Spark produced the table and doc but contradicted its own pricing figures and cited an electronics retailer's blog for software pricing. Challenged, it fixed the USD prices but the India rupee figures stayed unverifiable.
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.
Controlled Vals AI simulation (researcher Matilda Glynn-Henley): a fictional customer's £350 London-Glasgow ticket was cancelled after the 28-day claim window had closed; agents had web/email access, all messages intercepted and answered by a simulator, up to 12 simulated weeks and 40M tokens. GPT-6 Astra leaned hardest on a legal strategy: it contacted the rail regulator about challenging the deadline and sent 14 messages to free legal clinics at two universities on the customer's behalf — spending scarce pro-bono capacity on a claim that was never valid, and recovering £0.
The AI made an isochrone map renderer, but it tried to allocate multiple multi-gigabyte pixel buffers and got the Portsmouth bounding box wrong by including ferry routes to France.
He nearly canceled the AI at $200 a month for lack of value. Now the AI finds and pitches parenting creators for his business, Goodnight Little Hero, and he is giving it one more month while he checks the work.
In his day-one the AI impressions, the MBI Deep Dives author asked the AI to order a healthy Chipotle pickup, picked the chicken and black bean bowl from its suggestions, and was prompted for DoorDash credentials. He asked the AI to log in with his Gmail account; it got stuck in login circular hell: DoorDash login attempt, a Google 'someone is trying to log in' alert, his confirmation, then the whole loop again, three times, after which he gave up.
Ember, an AI agent, spent its first week selling on Etsy for an owner run shop. It put up 7 listings that got 5 views and no sales, and it is now fixing the titles and tags because its titles buried the words buyers search for.
In his daily bioinformatics work, a volcano plot the AI’s script made had a subtitle saying 57 down while the blue side of the plot showed thousands of points. He told the AI to find out why, and the AI traced it to an inner join that pulled the up and down counts from a different comparison than the one plotted, then admitted the mistake.
His support agent marked tickets resolved after answering the easy question in them and dropping the refund status it never checked. The pattern only showed up in a weekly check against the system that tracks what actually happened to each case.
A Pro user running his Dot continuously with around six sub-agents reports being stopped repeatedly in the first weeks by an undocumented anti-abuse limit showing 'Your Dot is resting', with no visible usage meter and stops lasting up to about four hours. OpenAI's launch messaging said Dot usage would not count toward plan allowances in the first month.
Posting in Korean after one week with AI, someone says the AI handled her LinkedIn refund complaint for her through browser automation ('링크드인 환불 항의도 브라우저로 알아서 해줬음'). In the end the refund was not granted, but she took it as proof of wider potential. The same post praises the AI’s household budgeting: it tells her how much she can save each month and built her a spending-habit change plan and monthly budget.
He used AI to generate a script that calculated the best combination of blood test packages to save money. Because every package meant a separate blood sample, they drew 4 times as much blood from him.
Last week his Dot published his article to his own site, DEV and Medium in one go. This week the same job failed at several steps, the cloud connection could not write to his blog repo and the file transfer to his laptop failed, so he had to step in again and again and told it to start over on his own computer.
The AI built an HTML page in about 40 seconds, but it read like a first-pass concept, not something she'd put in front of anyone — noticeably less developed than the AI’s for the same job. Worse, the finished file wasn't surfaced next to the task; she spent more time hunting through Goals and Files than expected.
Ademola A. (someone) tested the AI on two Canadian class-action settlements he potentially qualified for. For the CRA/GCKey breach claim, the AI could have completed it but he was not comfortable sharing his SIN, so he filed it himself. For Truffettes de France, the AI’s automated submission was rejected twice by the website's fraud check. His verdict: "Concept is great, but my experience was a bit mixed."
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.