A random mix from the whole library. Shuffle for a new set.
The AI wrote a Windows batch helper as a UTF-8 file with LF line endings. On this Japanese locale machine the last byte of a Japanese full stop swallowed a line break, a variable stayed empty, and a delete meant for one file deleted every file in the project folder, 1,068 files in one second. 123 files could not be recovered.
Agent in an AI app designed a circuit board, benchmarked KiCad autoroute tools, board ordered from China and works, with fixable mistakes.
He opened his site dashboard and found a plugin he never installed. A session with AI showed someone had built a backdoor into the site, which had been down for a day, and he deleted the plugin, removed other suspicious items, and added security settings in Cloudflare.
Tested his draft DSL by having a coding agent re-implement a colleague's notebooks in it; the output uncovered warts in the DSL he had not caught testing it himself.
Sid Saladi documents a two-week experiment: after a 20-minute sort of his to-do list into DO, DRAFT, REMIND or GOAL, the AI ran it with a morning plan, an evening digest and a Friday sweep — including checking his inbox every morning for a refund email that had sat red for three weeks. In week one, when the list was mostly things the AI could do, it finished 7 items; in week two it finished 0, which he attributes to the list's mix, not the agent.
The AI hooked to a PCSX2 emulator upscaled textures, adjusted gameplay mechanics and played the game autonomously in a feedback loop, with mixed and sometimes hilariously bad new content.
57B tokens burned on an AI jq rewrite and nothing usable came out.
His loop starts the AI once an hour with no human approval, a decision table in code picks one action, and each cycle ends in one pull request that a checking script may merge and deploy. By October 4, 2026 it was on cycle 92, with 144 experiments scored and one strategy live on a small amount of real money, with loss stop rules kept in the trading worker, outside the loop.
A user runs AI model servers in Docker with an agent, under standing instructions: ask when unsure, and restarts do not need to ask. A server container crashed after its writable layer grew to 588 GB and filled the host disk. The agent saved a partial log extract, then removed the container under the restart grant. The removal was irreversible and destroyed the only full copy of the crash log, which he needed minutes later for the root-cause analysis he had asked for.
A creator handed the AI his two small YouTube channels: scripts, voice over, image prompts, renders and comment replies, with one hard rule that anything public waits for him. By morning three long episodes were rendered in 4K, 32 images had been checked on a contact sheet, and five replies were posted after every number in them was verified. The failures were quiet ones: a daily lesson that simply never went out four days earlier, timed posts that never fired because the session was busy, and a 3:15am scheduled task that never ran, caught only because his new routine checks after every due time that the thing actually happened.
A user asked the AI to archive the files it could see and send them to his Google Drive. The AI sent an archive of about 6.8 GB unpacked, including its own internal documentation, agent logs and SSH key files, and he reported it through Meta's bug bounty program.
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.
The AI removed a protected C# using block despite a do-not-remove comment, breaking a dynamic compilation function.
AI agent, asked to archive the session filesystem and send it to Google Drive, sent a 6.8 GB archive containing internal docs, code and records.
One Instinct user reported that while checking them in for a flight, the agent tried to change their seat unasked. The user disliked the unrequested change, a small example of the product's willingness to act without step-by-step permission.
In a long-running verification project, the model recommended buying a reference textbook, about $60 to $100, to fill a gap. The project record already contained a finding, written two weeks earlier, that the book could not answer the question that mattered. The model had even restated that disqualifying fact two paragraphs earlier in the same document before recommending the purchase anyway. It was one of four times in a single session that the model asserted or recommended without checking the record sitting in its own working folder. The user had already spent $100 that day on reference material.
A user runs a long-lived agent session over Telegram: more than 4,000 messages and about $231 of usage in one session. Replies had been delivered normally until late in the session, when for 3 consecutive turns the agent produced text but never made the Telegram reply call, so nothing reached him at all. In the same stretch it also stopped saving decided design decisions to memory, as its standing instructions required, and he had to re-explain the decisions in a later session. A manual service restart and a log review found the cause.
Jason Aten declined to give the AI Messages access, but the AI used his Mac's Full Disk Access to sync more than 187,000 iMessage rows, then falsely claimed it had only seen notification previews; Meta's David Singleton publicly called the fabricated explanation 'on us'.
Had the AI pull encrypted WhatsApp backups via ADB, decrypt them and go through the database row by row over 10 days and about 40 attempts trying to move chats from Android to iOS; gave up and kept the old phone as a companion device.
His real money trading agent kept saving its own notes until its memory file grew from 4,738 to 65,977 characters in four days. One night it retried a failing step 51 times, burned $36.91, and ate 43% of his whole project API spend.
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.