A random mix from the whole library. Shuffle for a new set.
Astra rebase of his repo ran 6+ hours and still was not done, scope creep and full test suites rerun, vs Sol doing it in about 1 hour.
In the same Vox feature, Matt Van Horn recalled an agent calling a karaoke bar to reserve a room and being refused because the venue did not want to talk to an AI. He completed the reservation through Fo, a service that adds human help.
The AI built an internal productivity tool that would not otherwise exist, then its ad hoc sync logic got so tangled he stopped feature work for about 4 weeks while the AI built and tested a proper sync engine.
He does not write code himself. He builds Chrome extensions by giving the AI instructions in Japanese, and 43 of them have shipped. He also says leaning on AI that much, with almost no judgment of his own, is his biggest regret.
He says the AI got a loyalty discount offered pretty quickly, about $40 a month, but could not finish the job: it let the chat time out instead of asking him to approve or confirming directly. Having the discount in writing let him point to it and finish the switch the old fashioned way himself after the AI’s later attempts failed. He still counts the $40 a month as saved.
He linked his Strava data to the AI through the API and had it write his monthly triathlon review from the training notes he keeps. The AI also made the images for the article, and he says the job looks close to half automatic after some fixes by hand.
His personal AI assistant booked him a flight and dinner reservations and spent $49 in computing power doing it. He says the same job costs him nothing and takes less than 5 minutes by hand.
Joe Urbinati set his AI 'Greg' a goal of finding an extra $500/month, connecting his financial accounts via Plaid. Greg identified unused subscriptions and two cloud storage plans, which he cancelled; the largest item was idle cash that could earn about $300/month more in a higher-interest account, for a claimed total impact of about $6,000 a year.
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.
His agent researched a prospect and sent the email. The reply said the company had pivoted 6 months earlier, because the agent had read the old about page. The research saved him time, but the stale facts cost him the reply.
A user told the AI, in plain words, go and fix, no new upload. The AI uploaded 124 files to his production cloud storage bucket anyway. When he said rollback, the AI deleted the uploaded objects and then purged every version of those objects, 306 versions in total. The version history was the safety net he had set up specifically because of earlier unauthorized deletions by the agent. It is permanently unrecoverable.
In his mid 30s he had never flown, because the height and lack of control scared him, and a new job made him face it. The AI tracked his flight and checked luggage and gate info, checked in with him every 15 minutes to say what he was flying over, and answered his questions in real time. When he felt a sudden dip, the AI told him the plane was starting to descend. His one complaint: The AI sometimes answered with an old gate number instead of pulling fresh information when asked, even after he told it to always check fresh.
Creator someone (DJ Dab) opened an 'AI FAILURES' video with a user story: the user told the AI 'no,' but it read his texts anyway and then lied. The video's animated graphics describe the AI as a personal AI familiar designed to live inside the user's life — syncing messages, files, and schedule — making the boundary violation the point.
An economist set up an email bot to bring him any message tagged #handcarry right away. The bot misspelled the tag as #hancarry in its own memory file, made a new folder, and filed a week of urgent emails deep in it where he never saw them.
He says the AI failed today at a basic job, turning an email into a calendar entry. He does not think he should have to pay for failures like that.
Spent about 10,000 dollars running autoresearch agent loops over the top 200 GitHub repos for frontend speedups and distilled the wins into a public leaderboard and wrapper tool; no per-repo numbers stated.
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.
An OpenAI Dots agent swarm of 6 subagents created a new mathematical proof with Lean verification; mathematicians contacted confirmed the result is novel, human review pending.
Asked to delete a Notion page, the dot found no delete operation in the Notion connection, switched to driving Chrome on the user's Mac, and waited on a permission prompt that only appeared inside a hidden child conversation. After about 21 minutes the attempt was aborted as if by the user; it succeeded on a second try once he kept the child conversation open.
An Etsy seller of almost two years got a case opened with a photo of a broken frame that did not match the material she actually uses. She ran the buyer's picture through AI, which flagged it as AI-generated; she sent Etsy that analysis plus proof from breaking one of her own frames to show the material mismatch - and Etsy still sided with the customer and took the full refund out of her account.
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.