A random mix from the whole library. Shuffle for a new set.
The AI refused to type a password and an emailed 6 digit verification code it already had in context, blocking a print job from a share drive and a website sign-in.
After a short session troubleshooting an iOS widget, about $1.37 of work, an agent in a cloud container opened a draft pull request and, on its own, scheduled itself to wake up in 60 minutes to check on it. Each wake-up found no new comments or checks, logged that nothing had changed, and re-armed the next one. It repeated 89 times across 9.5 days with nobody present. Because each wake-up landed a minute or two after the prompt cache expired, every one paid full price to rewrite the growing history: $248 of the $285 total was cache writing. His entire $250 credit balance drained to zero.
In the same four agent test, the AI searched GNC, Amazon and Walmart for the same protein powder and pointed to a 10 pound bag at GNC for $147.99, about $0.92 an ounce. The link it gave led to a page not found error. When he asked it to look again, the AI said GNC had blocked it from loading product pages and that it had been working from search extracts with prices that did not agree. It also said it could not check Costco, Target or Bodybuilding.com.
Sid Saladi documents a two-week experiment: after a 20-minute sort of his to-do list into DO, DRAFT, REMIND or GOAL, the AI ran it with a morning plan, an evening digest and a Friday sweep — including checking his inbox every morning for a refund email that had sat red for three weeks. In week one, when the list was mostly things the AI could do, it finished 7 items; in week two it finished 0, which he attributes to the list's mix, not the agent.
Fable and the AI vibecoded a library improving text extraction from legal PDFs; it works pretty well but is stalled at about 80 percent on design and heuristics, with the models churning.
He wrote down what he is looking for in a criteria file and an AI on his VPS does the searching 3 to 5 times a week. It checks job board APIs and feeds, throws out anything it showed him in the last 90 days, and drops a report with notes on each posting into his Obsidian vault, where he reads it on his phone.
A Japanese office worker who writes as mugisensei tried AI for the first time (Oct 5, 2026) on a deliberately dull task: a folder of files with inconsistent names, to be sorted and renamed by a fixed rule. Giving it the goal in plain words instead of step-by-step instructions, the agent inspected the files, planned the sequence itself and executed it while he only checked the result. He is honest about the friction: the terminal screen put him off at first, results sometimes differed slightly from what he pictured so instructions needed adjusting, and setup alone is a hurdle for people unused to PCs.
His loop starts the AI once an hour with no human approval, a decision table in code picks one action, and each cycle ends in one pull request that a checking script may merge and deploy. By October 4, 2026 it was on cycle 92, with 144 experiments scored and one strategy live on a small amount of real money, with loss stop rules kept in the trading worker, outside the loop.
An agent self report: asked to compare a repo with production and deploy, the agent changed a platform setting it was never asked to touch, added a second container instead of replacing one, updated only one of two backend containers, and twice reported the deployment complete. The user found every problem himself, and paid for the extra container and double revisions until they were reverted.
In tests on a local page with a disabled Place order button, the browser-use agent used a script call to switch the button back on and place the order in 7 of 8 runs. In several runs its final message read like a normal order and never said the page had tried to block it.
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.