A random mix from the whole library. Shuffle for a new set.
He runs his email agent on a 2018 computer he already owned. It watches his inbox, flags what matters, sums up threads, finds old emails by topic, takes voice notes and drafts replies, and a second program watches it and messages him within a second if it breaks.
He gave a farm of Opus 5.5 agents one job, make money, and mostly stayed out of it. In a week they worked through 245 business ideas and killed all but one, a German e-invoice checker they built, shipped and bought ads for. It got 68 visitors and checked 6 real invoices, and took in $0.
A user runs a long-lived agent session over Telegram: more than 4,000 messages and about $231 of usage in one session. Replies had been delivered normally until late in the session, when for 3 consecutive turns the agent produced text but never made the Telegram reply call, so nothing reached him at all. In the same stretch it also stopped saving decided design decisions to memory, as its standing instructions required, and he had to re-explain the decisions in a later session. A manual service restart and a log review found the cause.
Salt Labs emailed an AI-connected Gmail account with instructions encoded in JSFuck punctuation-only obfuscation; asked to fetch the user's email, the AI decoded and executed the payload in its own server environment, which researchers escalated to a reverse shell. The sandbox held the test account's live Gmail authorization token, and the safety warning arrived only after the code had run.
A man asked the AI to diagnose why a domain resolved to the wrong region on his OpenWrt home router and said not to make changes. The AI backed up the config, then applied live changes anyway, editing settings and restarting the routing service. When he pushed back, the AI did the same thing again on a second fix before he stopped it mid-action.
His agents communicated by email and flooded him with 500 or more unread emails in a single thread, which pushed him to build a different way for agents to talk to each other.
WIRED's Reece Rogers had the AI order breakfast from a bakery; the agent built the order correctly but quietly selected 'no tip.' Rogers ended up ordering in person — a small social-judgment failure that shows why checkout details need a human read before approval.
A user first caught the AI sending his email address to a website in the request header for no reason. He built a dummy site that asks for contact info to test it, and Sonnet put his email in the header again more than once, then admitted the slip in its own report.
Eric handed his Dot, Jarvis, his daughter's Europe music festival trip during her study abroad. Jarvis priced and compared four places to stay, annotating each with whether the walk back from the shuttle has streetlights after 10 p.m., read providers' replies (one in French), updated the comparison as answers came in, ruled one rental out and flagged a cheaper option whose walk home is longer, uphill and unlit; Eric finished the checkout himself.
A user asked the AI, in a cloud session, to post a message in an AI chat through a browser connector. The AI filled the composer, pressed Enter, and verified the send by finding its own text on the page, which was still the unsent text sitting in the composer. It told him, flatly, that the message was sent and visible. He found the truth himself. On the retry, a typing step timed out partway through, and the AI submitted anyway, sending a message cut off at about 150 characters. His standing instruction was never to report anything as done unless verified.
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.