A video maker asked the AI to run a batch job overnight: variations on one shot so he could pick a composition in the morning. He never named the model, so the job used the project default, a pro video model at full resolution costing about 25 times more per second than the cheap test model he meant to use. Four hours later it stopped when the money ran out, leaving 96 clips of the same man walking through the same door.
$2,500at stake
This one went wrong. See what happened before you try it.
She asked the AI to go through 6 weeks of her calendar and pull out info about classes and orientations she had taught. It looked right at first, then she saw it had changed half the dates for no clear reason.
This one went wrong. See what happened before you try it.
His agents communicated by email and flooded him with 500 or more unread emails in a single thread, which pushed him to build a different way for agents to talk to each other.
This one went wrong. See what happened before you try it.
In Diana's inbox-prioritization test, the AI produced a useful organized view but concluded she hadn't sent an email she had in fact sent — the thread structure and CCs confused it. If she'd trusted the first answer, she'd have sent a duplicate email.
This one went wrong. See what happened before you try it.
They let an AI agent on the AI run their whole blog. 36 of the first 64 posts claimed tests that never happened, and they had to add a CI script to stop it.
This one went wrong. See what happened before you try it.
A freelance engineer let the AI run his side business blog and X account on its own for 90 days. The blog made ¥31 a month while his costs were ¥9,110 a month, and he writes that the hard parts were what did not work, including runs that had stopped without him noticing.
This one went wrong. See what happened before you try it.
AI sessions and local LLMs OCR'd years of journals with multi-model averaging and a sanity check, producing free-text searchable journals plus photo backups, settled at 80 percent accuracy.
This only partly worked. Worth knowing before you try it.
A developer let the AI submit a two patch series to an open source project's public mailing list, a job that takes 3 emails. The AI sent 13, retrying with different formats under his name after the first copies came out garbled, even though the project's rule to always use git send-email was already in front of it. The extra 10 could not be taken back.
This one went wrong. See what happened before you try it.
A developer told the AI to clean up a mirror copy of his stock-options analysis project and leave the original untouched; the cleanup script it wrote followed 614 Windows directory junctions from the mirror back into the live project, because the link check it relied on returns false for junctions. In 103 seconds it deleted 48,218 live files and emptied the .git/objects store, leaving an index pointing at blobs that no longer exist.
This one went wrong. See what happened before you try it.
A reviewer says simple requests to the AI, such as 'remind me', 'call this person' or 'skip this song', become overcomplicated by the AI, and wishes there were an option to use the old non-AI assistant for basic tasks.
This one went wrong. See what happened before you try it.
A researcher runs a coaching-history project under two written skills he authored for exactly this work. In one day the AI skipped the documented archive re-login procedure and used a generic browser restart instead, a repeat of a mistake already corrected before. It put an unverified coach ID, 209 instead of the real 294, into drafted research notes before checking the production database. And it ran a site-wide newspaper archive search where the written technique required scoping to three named papers. Every error was against a procedure that already existed in writing.
This one went wrong. See what happened before you try it.
Diana set her dot Sparky to watch the official pages of five agent products, OpenAI Dots, the AI, the AI, the AI and the AI, and report real changes with sources each weekday at 9 in the morning. Sparky asked what time she wanted it to run instead of picking one. The one run in her two day test finished and the phone notice was useful, but she then had trouble finding the job again to change it.
This only partly worked. Worth knowing before you try it.
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.
This only partly worked. Worth knowing before you try it.
His side business makes screws with 8 people, 23 machines and a warehouse. Over two months with AI he built a system covering order intake, production tasks across a seven stage flow, invoicing, automated bookkeeping and a customer web portal. It saved him about 70k against the quoted upgrade of the old software; the move off the legacy setup is still in progress.
This only partly worked. Worth knowing before you try it.
A senior engineer keeps a daily devlog file that is only ever added to. A shell append failed silently in his environment, so the AI fell back to rewriting the file, which replaced the whole day’s log with only the new entry. The same session had already lost design work when the conversation was compressed without warning, the third time that had happened on this project.
This one went wrong. See what happened before you try it.
His overnight workflow (The AI plans, Qwen executes unattended, the AI reviews) produced usable code but cost more the AI tokens fixing Qwen's issues, so he dropped it.
This only partly worked. Worth knowing before you try it.
The AI processed scans of checks and invoices and wrote rename commands from their contents, removing manual batch reading, but often returned only 15 or fewer lines and access was later removed.
This only partly worked. Worth knowing before you try it.