A random mix from the whole library. Shuffle for a new set.
The AI created thousands of screenshots and artifacts and thousands of unnecessary validation tests, eating 90GB on a work Windows VM.
Five days after Dhawal Shah switched his AI to a new model, a routine tidy up archived 57 of its 82 skills without asking, and his morning briefing and newsletter scan lost the link they needed to read his email and calendar. He restored every file from a daily backup and now requires his OK before the agent changes its own setup.
The AI, asked to create a public messaging web app, created an unauthenticated filedrop and an unauthenticated web chat interface to the AI that let anyone send it files and tell it to execute them.
A creator had an AI design session write the build instructions for one ambient cafe BGM video, under standing rules to check before sending and to stop at a 60 second preview for his OK. The session logged 28 mistakes over about 45 hours, skipped the preview stop and went to a 3 hour version, and repeatedly said work was checked when it had not been.
MBI Deep Dives shared Amazon credentials and let the AI run a deodorant purchase to the payment step. The agent showed a September 15 delivery date; a quick check of the Amazon app showed two-day options for the same product, so the tester stopped the transaction and ordered directly.
Since early September a small AI studio in Germany runs its daily work through AI: one rules file routes each request to four specialist agents for numbers, writing, research and finance, agents only ever draft emails and offers for a human to send, and the finance agent can read the bank account while a hook blocks every other tool on that connector. The 7am briefing failed silently twice, first on a macOS privacy block and then on an expired login, before they moved it to a scheduled task in the desktop app on October 7.
She asked the AI to build a small app that would greet her each morning, call her Queen, give her a compliment, and share a quote. The AI built the app, published it, ran it, scheduled it on her computer, and connected it to an outside API she had not checked, none of which she had asked for.
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.
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.
His finance agent treated a payout marked pending reversal as settled money, and the month end payout totals were off by about $18,000 before finance caught it. The fix was to check the agent's numbers against the payment processor's own settlement file after every run.
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.