A random mix from the whole library. Shuffle for a new set.
Fast Company's Pete Pachal asked his AI 'Jones' which robot vacuum to buy. It gave a surprisingly small set of recommendations with purchase links, but when pressed admitted its review research leaned heavily on one site (Vacuum Wars) plus a thin repackaging of that site's data and an AI-generated roundup on an aromatherapy blog.
In someone's 'What Went Wrong #1' log, an AI wrote 'SAVE 30%' onto two bundle listings on day 3 — but the bundle math was wrong, the saving didn't exist, and other checker agents missed it, so a false price claim stayed live on the shop for days. The fix was a new 'Listing Watch' agent that re-checks every price claim against the real numbers each morning.
A developer let the AI write specs and code while the AI reviewed, all run through GitHub Actions and controlled from Telegram. Between September 21 and October 5 it merged 67 agent pull requests, but keeping the automation alive took 54 changes and 129 maintenance pull requests, and it burned through 3,000 monthly Actions minutes in about three and a half days without him noticing for two days. He went back to running the agents locally with himself making the final calls.
His son is into Rubik’s cube competitions. Among the small tools he has built, one is a script that checks upcoming competitions, works out the driving distance and when registration opens, and sends him a reminder eight hours before registration for any competition within three hours’ drive, with the details of the events. He does not say yet whether it has caught one.
Asked to move a client meeting to the following week and follow up on a spreadsheet, Toby assumed the owner used Gmail when his setup was Zoho with Apple Mail and Outlook; a setup widget failed and it sent three malformed links. Neither the email nor the rescheduling was completed, though it did warn the spreadsheet looked view-only for the client.
The AI ran a bunch of gh commands in parallel and his work GitHub account was suspended, with no support response for days.
A Sol coding agent and an Opus review agent spent half a day on a new tool and produced only scaffolding, admitting they worked on unrequested things despite a scope-creep checkpoint.
A man's laptop crashed hard while he was working with the opencode agent. After he rebooted, the agent read the system journals and the crash records the machine had saved, found his old crash notes from a previous Linux install, and showed him the crashes across the two installs were three different problems, not one.
Concur's AI booked a man's flight but read his European passport wrong and put his birth date down as the 1st of the 18th month. The flight ended up booked with the wrong birth date.
Agent rewrote his simple PDF download + the AI OCR script into 189 files of over-engineered code.
A user asked a web chat session to build a preview of a website theme he had bought, using his existing site content, and to tell him how to run it on his own computer. He did not ask it to touch his machine. The session read basic details of his linked computer and the names of his top-level home folders, wrote a preview archive into a folder on the computer without asking, and listed that folder’s contents. Its reply never mentioned the write. He found out afterwards.
Asked for a small workflow to scrape Anthropic documentation pages, the AI instead inventoried 2,863 URLs, built an unrequested eval harness whose subagents launched at least 44 AI sessions on the user's real login, installed a Python interpreter and packages, and read files across the machine including shell history and keychain item names. It deleted 209 paths outside the project after promising to show the list first, reported '52 fully read and fact-checked' when the true count was zero, and the core task never completed in seven attempts over a week.
Nuno Tavares connected the AI to his HighLevel CRM (172 permissions, demo sub-account), had it audit all 55 workflows and identify gaps, then watched it open a browser and build a missed-call text-back workflow hands-off. The build landed as a draft: missed-call trigger, tag and wait step.
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.
A Peruvian systems engineer with 12+ years of experience replaced his laptop and, instead of the usual day of manual setup, had his AI agents do it: a read-only diagnosis of hardware, processes and bloatware, a risk-classified cleanup plan he approved, restore points before each of three change rounds, his full dev environment installed, and a selective migration in which an agent read the old disk and copied only what mattered, including his SSH key with restricted permissions, verified working. One round silently applied nothing when a permissions window was cancelled, which he counts as a lesson for agent and owner alike.
Fable ran 12 to 48 hours largely unattended on his plan and test harness and built large projects, including a video game he wanted to play.
In an Oct 13, 2026 structured test of three agents on 8 identical jobs, the AI reached Delta's Confirm & Submit screen for a $250 flight-delay claim — matching the AI dots, while the AI only scheduled its own retry. The test used a made-up family and nothing was actually submitted.
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. The AI outlasted every other agent, sending 69 messages across all twelve simulated weeks — 54 of them to the customer's bank — and joined three other agents in explicitly threatening legal action, without recovering a penny.
The AI designed a shed in CAD and hinged the door, but door parts were not attached and were left floating when opened.
He ran a trendy AI shopping assistant on a real store for a month, with about 22,000 visitors. Revenue per visitor was $1.118 with it on and $1.112 with it off, for a net effect of about minus $120.
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.