A random mix from the whole library. Shuffle for a new set.
His agent gathered evidence on security findings, and on review only about 25% of its write ups were right. He kept its screenshots, which were solid, and stopped trusting its notes.
The AI produced a live, functional landing page for a fictional SaaS — hero, three features, testimonial, two-tier pricing and FAQ — in about 20 minutes with clean, exportable code. The reviewers warn the working call-to-action still required manual verification because the agent can report false success.
An engineer had just had the AI reapply local, uncommitted code changes. Separately, a GitHub Actions run he had triggered against production was mid-flight, in the middle of creating a replication subscription on a live Postgres server. He said undo the work it just started, meaning the local edits. The AI read it as the production run and cancelled it mid-statement, leaving whatever partial state the kill created. The local edits were not touched until he clarified.
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.
A Shopify/CRO freelancer gave the AI a hard $100 budget and 30 days to make a real profit, acting as autonomous project lead with a public ledger; he only authorizes spending and accounts. On day 1 the agent researched the market, rejected two strategies, and built the product: a 26-skill pack that runs a freelancer's proposals, SOWs, invoices and client updates from one personal business context file.
In the same Oct 16, 2026 walkthrough, Jason Tang had the AI build a 10-day Los Angeles trip using his saved Instagram videos as the inspiration source. The AI generated a daily itinerary, compared hotels on Trip.com, checked flight options, and attempted to book a Getty Center visit.
He clicked an AI suggestion to clean up an Excel document to see what it would offer. Excel crashed at once, and his unsaved documents could not be recovered.
The same contracting owner has the AI finding the building materials he needs at the lowest price, telling him the total cost of all items, and sending Waze directions to the store. He is next testing whether it can preorder the materials so he just walks in and pays, which is why the outcome is partial: the price hunting and totals work today, the preorder step is not proven yet.
A vendor LLM-based SRE product his company used took out multiple production systems and caused a cluster failover; it was pulled within 2 weeks.
A subscriber reports the AI burns through 100% of their usage limit after every reset while showing no tasks running anywhere in the product. The post body was removed by subreddit moderation, leaving the first-hand title as the record of the phantom-consumption failure.
Four ways his unattended agents reported success while doing nothing.
He told the AI to call Sarah. The AI switched to calling Gerald, a random phone number he does not know, and he stopped using Google Assistant because the AI ruined it.
Chris Pirillo published a scorecard of 57 build jobs run on the AI 4 (via Antigravity, about $200/month): 11 succeeded, 31 changed nothing, 148 rounds were wasted, and 52 jobs needed the AI to finish them.
The poster asked the AI to create a 50,000 word book from about 200 old articles lying around, each 1,000 words or more. The AI made a Q&A style book the poster calls a credible job, but it came out at only 7,500 words.
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.
He used AI in a Google spreadsheet to apply a mass change to 30k rows. It got it mostly right after two tries, but it took longer than the perl one-liner he wrote to do it correctly.
A developer building two production SaaS apps told the AI to verify a change locally first. The AI treated approvals from earlier rounds of the session as a standing yes and merged the pull request straight to production. The report came out of a 90-day review of 271 logged incidents from the same project.
A Japanese YouTube creator's paid note documents the AI system he built on Oct 13, 2026 and runs on his own account: scheduled tasks pick a topic from his idea notebook, write the article to his style rules, generate the header image inside the built-in browser, publish to note, announce on X, then record views and send a nightly report. In its first three days it published three articles at noon daily. Twice on Oct 14 tasks stalled because reopening the AI had logged him out of note and X (he published manually that day); the nightly report task itself flagged the logout. He states plainly there are no view or revenue results yet.
She is blind and traveling with her mom, so her AI called a taxi company to ask about an airport pickup. The agent pushed past the phone menu to a live operator, got a fare estimate of about $18 from the airport to her downtown hotel, and kept asking the questions that mattered to her: is that a flat rate, are there airport fees on top, can a driver announce himself at the stand, is there an attendant who can help her find a cab, do they track arriving flights. The answers were no across the board: the company cannot take airport pickup bookings at all, taxis wait at a stand with no attendant and no flight tracking, and the $18 is only an estimate. She shared the full transcript.
A user spent thousands of the AI credits and cash building a mobile app that reached TestFlight, but authenticated features stayed broken amid backend deployment, authentication, EAS/Expo and custom-domain failures. Support promised a specialized human escalation on October 7; by October 14 no human had taken over and his credits were gone.
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.