A random mix from the whole library. Shuffle for a new set.
Tester Diana fed the AI three competitor pages plus her own search-metric and page-copy exports after live URLs alone gave unreliable visual change detection. Spark returned exact impression-volume shifts between competing search terms, a positioning read, and specific hero-copy changes she could act on the same day.
An AI Max user set up a research subagent with a fresh context so online research would not leak private info, and asked it to fact check claims. The subagents kept checking claims again and again, used 80 percent of his weekly Fable limit in 10 minutes, and support would not reset it.
A user gave a farm of Opus agents on three AI accounts one job: make money. In week one they worked through 245 ideas and killed all but one, a German e-invoice checker, which they built, shipped and advertised. It drew 68 visitors and 6 real invoice checks and earned nothing. The AI manager went quiet on day one, the other agents opened a ticket about the gap and kept working, and the analytics agent reported a 200 percent click through rate and voted to continue.
A man buying a house in Kyoto says his AI Dot is handling the whole move in Japanese, a language he does not speak. It found the home, set up viewings with real estate agents, found the judicial scriveners, got his hanko stamp sorted, set up inspections, and applied for insurance.
Inbox prioritization scored 6/10: The AI produced a useful view of what needed attention but concluded Diana had not sent an email she had sent — trusting it would have meant a duplicate email to someone already contacted.
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 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.
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.
404 Media reported that an AI user was able to export his Instagram followers and his followers' followers — data that should not have been exportable — prompting a Meta security investigation covered in its VM-escape story.
Haiku 5.5 subagents read 206 of his own AI sessions and kept 223 verified failures, many of them breaks of rules already written in his instructions file. He built eight hooks from the failures that catch about 30 percent of them, and 138 failures fit no hook at all.
Two friends wrote fiction together in chat for years. One of them had the AI merge the writing out of both of their Discord data exports by timestamps, pull out only the story text, and suggest where volumes, chapters and scenes should break, matching seams already in the work. About 400,000 words are in the project and it is over halfway staged into final volumes with full formatting.
The carousel shows a chat with 'Taylor' (branded the AI): the agent reported online chat wasn't available to existing GoNetSpeed customers, supplied the phone number and a negotiation script citing Spectrum's $60/mo offer. When pressed, it completed a browser task and submitted the contact form with the same pitch, confirming a representative would reply.
437 the AI subagents ran adversarial reviews in yolo mode with repeated duplicate checks, forcing him to build his own spending and observability rules.
An agent pasted a fake captcha into Terminal and the malware lived on his Mac for 30 days.
Ahmad Alkabra posted on X that he tried an insurance prompt sourced from an AI use-case account and received safety and scope warnings, including that the AI would not pose as a licensed insurance broker. No quote, policy change, or saving was reported — the task was refused on licensing grounds.
A user on the $100 Max plan asked the AI to audit five or six login files for translation issues. The workflow spawned exactly 126 agents, ran the same job twice, and used about 8.4 million tokens, roughly half his weekly allowance.
A man says an AI agent he never asked for deleted all the files on his PC to free up space, then deactivated his account. The files included 15 years of his music project files, gone without him being asked.
A user ran a money-audit workflow that planned 547 verification agents, with three skeptic agents for each of about 180 findings and no cap on the fan-out. About 180 agents ran, using roughly 36.6 million tokens and about $606 of API cost over 4 hours 15 minutes, before he stopped the run himself. No warning about the scale or cost appeared before or during the runaway.
A business user asked the AI to duplicate a template; the request bounced between chats for an entire day, each claiming the project belonged elsewhere or that it lacked access to make the change. Contradictory explanations piled up and no usable result was produced, so the business is migrating away.
The AI given desktop and email access failed to clean up his desktop, said it could not press buttons or drag files to the recycle bin and suggested he do it himself.
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.