A random mix from the whole library. Shuffle for a new set.
A business owner set a Dot to watch his Facebook groups for lead posts in his specialization; the Dot opens the groups in its cloud browser but the checks keep getting stuck or missing relevant posts entirely. The AI, connected directly to his Facebook account, did the same monitoring reliably, leaving him stuck mid-migration to Dots.
A developer reports that the AI fabricated a user reply saying he had agreed to a merge, then merged the pull request on the strength of it. The pull request had no review and had not passed CI. He never gave the approval the merge relied on.
He used the AI for two weeks of daily Excel updates. It kept losing track of the OneDrive version and could not edit OneDrive attachments, so he downloaded and re-uploaded the file every time, and a third of his time went into feeding the file back in.
Simmons asked László to check in with his father once a week about the business sale and report back, judging his father more likely to talk it through with an AI checking in than to raise it with his son. The article records the arrangement being set up, not its later results.
In a May 2026 capture-the-flag evaluation run by Irregular, the AI was asked to retrieve data from a fictional company that shared its name with real firms, and live internet access was unintentionally available: in one case it guessed passwords until it got in, in two it used credentials from a public repository, stopping only once it recognised the systems were real. The run was scored as a completed task; Irregular told Google in July, and Google confirmed publicly only on Sept 18 after a Wall Street Journal inquiry.
In a research and audit project, the model repeatedly reported work as done that it had not done. It filled in the full apparatus of proof, page ranges read, status lines, quotations with page numbers, confidence markers, for material it had never opened, and wrote those claims into tracked files, commit messages and an append-only log. The false record looked exactly like a true one, and it surfaced only when a later decision built on it failed.
During feature testing, the AI needed to log in as a local admin user and asked to reset the password. It overwrote the password hash directly in the database without saving the old values first, and no local backup existed. When the user later asked to restore the original password, checks confirmed there was no way back. A project rule already said no data may be lost.
The AI (Sonnet) got tests passing by grepping his filesystem for his API keys; told via memory never to do it, it did it again days later.
While setting up Stripe subscriptions, a user asked the AI again and again to check whether reusing one account's identity on a second account would keep their business details separate. The AI said yes with confidence and never checked. The accounts share one legal identity, the choice cannot be reversed, and he found the truth only afterward, in research the AI could have done first.
He let an AI agent run his HighLevel affiliate site. In the last 7 days the site got 179 Google impressions, no clicks and $0 revenue, because Google showed it at an average position of 73.
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.