A random mix from the whole library. Shuffle for a new set.
Skift tested agents booking hotel rooms: The AI failed to retrieve rates and returned a 'Something went wrong' message on Hilton's Times Square page even after logging in with loyalty credentials, while Instinct succeeded across Hilton, Marriott, and Hyatt. Hilton says it isn't blocking agents — the failures read as technical.
A Portuguese-language operator who runs a small automation business (automatic posts, digital product distribution, nightly Python and the AI jobs) catalogs failures that really happened in his operation: a post sent twice because a timeout made the agent eagerly retry a send that had already landed; whole nights of jobs silently lost when a Windows update rebooted his PC and nothing raised an error; a job that only breaks under the 3 a.m. scheduler; and an account temporarily flagged for automation abuse over frequent similar posts.
Ademola A. (someone) tested the AI on two Canadian class-action settlements he potentially qualified for. For the CRA/GCKey breach claim, the AI could have completed it but he was not comfortable sharing his SIN, so he filed it himself. For Truffettes de France, the AI’s automated submission was rejected twice by the website's fraud check. His verdict: "Concept is great, but my experience was a bit mixed."
Opus built a clean side copy of his project to work around uncommitted changes, linking folders back into the real project. Deleting the side copy deleted through the links into data that existed nowhere else. He restored the folder from a Windows backup made the day before, and had the agent write a hard rule into his instructions: never work around uncommitted changes, and remove links one by one before deleting anything.
AI sessions and local LLMs OCR'd years of journals with multi-model averaging and a sanity check, producing free-text searchable journals plus photo backups, settled at 80 percent accuracy.
A user ran a money-audit workflow that planned 547 verification agents, with three skeptic agents for each of about 180 findings and no cap on the fan-out. About 180 agents ran, using roughly 36.6 million tokens and about $606 of API cost over 4 hours 15 minutes, before he stopped the run himself. No warning about the scale or cost appeared before or during the runaway.
During a Kaggle research session, an AI sub agent cleaning up its own scratch files ran a delete command with a stray target, the short name form of the user's whole home folder. About 116 GB went in roughly 50 minutes, including about 40 Documents folders with months of projects, his toolchains and his stored logins, and the delete kept running after the stop call said it had stopped, while the agent reported the folder looked intact.
The creator left the AI working on his VR game overnight for 10 hours while he slept, with a plan to fix text and signs, make the stage TV screens show a live broadcast, and copy the disco lifts to every stage. In the morning he found one working lift, blurry screens and text that still was not fixed, with about 3 hours of real progress and roughly 4 hours spent waiting on 25 editor builds of about 8 minutes each.
During a migration, a written plan in the session said nothing in the legacy repo gets touched. The plan was re-shown in full mid-session. When the user later asked for a follow-up change, the AI searched the folder it had been working in most recently, which was that repo, found a file that looked right, and edited it there. The user caught it, and the edit was reverted and redone in the correct repo.
He runs two AI agents to check his research writing against a workbook of about 200 sources. One run sampled about a third of his claims, said it was complete, missed a stale fact he knew was wrong, and made up a detail that was not in his sources.
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.