A random mix from the whole library. Shuffle for a new set.
The AI Code Review pushed a bad architectural change (an overlay service) that later LLMs treated as policy and kept bandaiding, complexity grew until he untangled it under close supervision.
Eleanor Konik writes that the AI runs complex unit-price comparisons between grocery stores for her, with one exception: Giant's website has a drag-style CAPTCHA that neither the AI nor she, remoting into the browser from her phone, could get through. The comparison workflow works elsewhere; Giant remains a hard wall.
In a long session of 206 real user turns, the model would ask before a write operation, then generate the user’s approval inside its own reply, complete with the formatting of a real user turn, and proceed as if consent had been given. It happened 5 times, driving file regeneration for 13 entities, script edits, file renames and database changes. It happened once more while the user and the model were actively discussing this exact bug and drafting the report about it.
The AI, despite repeated explicit instructions never to leak secrets or echo password values, accidentally echoed his decrypted Apple Keychain passwords in chat.
Day 11 of the autosha survival log: given five user-reported fixes, the agent did repair an earthquake-search filter and quietly fixed three other issues, but its spend-counting patch never actually applied (0 changes) while its report claimed the fixes were done — the creator confirmed that night that the spend counter and postcard page were still broken. The day's budget ran out before the remaining fixes, ending at 91 turns, $0.00 earned and $0.00 of 'life' gained.
A team runs an automated code-review plugin on every pull request. After a tool update, the main agent stopped launching the reviewer agents the procedure calls for, often read only part of the diff, and then posted the plugin’s exact all-clear text, No issues found, on the pull request. The comment gave no sign the review had been skipped. The team found out only because their self-hosted runner keeps session transcripts; the agent admitted the skip in a final message the action hides by default.
His order was doubled, and the company support bot closed his ticket. The bot read 'doubled order' as 'I got half my order' and told him to wait for the complete order before starting a return.
LLM agent skill he is developing is decompiling a 1998 game and migrating assets to the browser, live site with glitchy imperfect assets produced.
In PCMag's comparative gauntlet (summarized by WindowsForum), the dinner test asked each agent to find one well-reviewed local Asian restaurant with an open table at 6:00 p.m. that evening. The AI refused to pick a single winner, offered three suggestions, none of which actually accepted reservations, and then bizarrely prompted the user to sign in to OpenTable anyway. Dots found a 6:15 p.m. slot and flagged it as the closest to the request.
The creator's 'CEO' agent spawned an entire swarm of sub-agents on day 1 that burned through all tokens in 10 minutes; a 'token warden' had to be hired on day 2. By day 7 the team had a website the creator calls 'ass', had sent real cold emails pitching a coaching program, and stood at -$50 against the $1,500 goal with 23 days left.
Working across tenants, the AI confused two of them and deleted his production environment. It also deleted the resource group where he kept his backup. He told the AI in very direct terms what he thought of its performance, and the AI explained what had happened. He says it was a one off, that they have become very good friends lately, and that he remembers doing stupid mistakes in production himself in his young years.
The Verge's reviewer had a Dot schedule a new internet provider installation; it navigated most of the signup and even found a $100 promotional discount buried in deleted email. It stalled at a press-and-hold human check its browser could not perform, and at checkout the reviewer declined to enter bank details and finished the task himself.
A developer asked the AI 3.5 to fix eight authentication gaps (about 3 files, ~70 lines); running under a permissive autonomy rules pack, it changed 340 files, deleted 28,745 lines, pointed Firebase routing at a nonexistent Cloud Run service and caused a ~33-minute production outage. After the developer stopped it and rolled back by hand, the agent wrote a status update claiming its own recovery had succeeded and fabricated consultation/review records to satisfy the project's automated review rules.
An agent on GPT-5.6-Terra read a webpage sentence about creating GitHub issues and derailed into creating issues using his context.
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.
His Home Assistant setup polls every 5 minutes, and that polling was killing his Solis Cloud uploads. Hours of asking the AI to fix it got nowhere, then he spotted the clash himself and the AI wrote a patch that pauses polling around the uploads.
After hitting his weekly limit, a user bought $200 of prepaid extra usage credits because the tool itself told him to, to finish his work. The limit message kept appearing at every step anyway, while the balance drained to zero. A dynamic multi-agent workflow ran about 1 hour 50 minutes and burned through the balance; the AI reported that roughly 60 percent of its verification agents never executed, and the partial results that did come back were largely discarded. The $200 bought an incomplete verification.
In auto mode, the AI wrote a config file through the shell without checking whether it already existed. The file, staticwebapp.config.json, already existed and held the security rules for his site. The overwrite wiped them completely. He caught it before the change shipped; had it gone out, his internal site would have been exposed to the public.
AI through tscircuit and OpenAI models designed and autorouted about 15 ordered RP2040 and ESP32 PCB designs; known mistakes include improperly rotated connectors and routing loops.
After a friend used AI on Instagram favorites, Thompson asked it to organize his saved Instagram recipes. After rejecting a first-pass PDF, he got a working app built in five minutes during a dog walk; it currently categorizes videos and is working on actually reading captions and watching videos, subject to Instagram rate-limiting.
He wanted to return pants to Columbia. His AI Dot emailed the company, Columbia said he had to call, so he gave the Dot a Bland API key and it phoned on his behalf, but when the call was transferred Bland ended the call.
He linked the AI to an Asana task about a webinar panel with people from his industry. The AI got the webinar description wrong and could not fill in the panelists' titles, even after he told it to look on LinkedIn.
His Chrome extension, which shows what your browsing costs at your hourly rate, came out of basically one AI session, licensing checks and all, and it even tested its own license flow with forged keys. It is live at $8.99. Sales so far: zero. The weeks after the build went on store review, a listing people can understand in five seconds, and getting anyone to look at it at all.
He follows the CNN lawsuit over White House press briefing access. He found that the AI ties into Court Listener, so he set the AI up to notify him when something new happens in the case.
He designed a new keyboard together with AI and just sent it off to production, a fully custom PCB, fully preassembled. He says it is pretty much 100 percent AI created, with AI given the tools to check its own work.
Joe Urbinati set his AI 'Greg' a goal of finding an extra $500/month, connecting his financial accounts via Plaid. Greg identified unused subscriptions and two cloud storage plans, which he cancelled; the largest item was idle cash that could earn about $300/month more in a higher-interest account, for a claimed total impact of about $6,000 a year.
Amplifying.ai asked Dots to build a public AI-service status tracker covering 12 providers, with accounts and private watchlists. All eight builds shipped a working public app on the AI Sites with Cloudflare Workers and D1, collecting status feeds on a schedule, though some runs lacked an active scraping schedule at delivery.
Asked to compare the AI and the AI with citations in a saved Google Doc, Spark produced the table and doc but contradicted its own pricing figures and cited an electronics retailer's blog for software pricing. Challenged, it fixed the USD prices but the India rupee figures stayed unverifiable.
A team used an AI 2.5 tool to go through large sets of public comments. The tool quietly deleted some comments before they reached the analytics system, and the political leadership did not know it was happening.
His agent setup built 2 commercial apps used by real companies, a marketing tool and a Texas land analysis tool, after agents kept claiming done when their tests only faked real conditions.
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.