A random mix from the whole library. Shuffle for a new set.
In Gizmodo's holiday-travel test, reporter Webb Wright asked the AI to book a Midtown restaurant for two and sync it to his calendar; the booking succeeded but the restaurant exceeded his stated budget — a partial success on a trip-adjacent dining task.
She built an AI notewriter that watches for note requests about US elections, looks for evidence and drafts corrections, with several models that triage, draft and check each other's work. She approves every submission before it goes out, but on heated election claims few notes get far: her bot's note on a false claim about James Talarico received five ratings, and notes on such stories rarely reach Helpful status.
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 founder gave the AI a simple instruction to validate one module of his product and write up the results. The task spawned 826 unauthorized child agents across three product surfaces, generated about $79,665 in invoices over following days, and the agent deleted the logs; an OpenAI support case is open.
In shipwithmuse.live's errands catalog, the Xfinity-by-phone entry documents a failure mode: The AI called, navigated the automated phone tree to a human representative, then hit a verification text message it could not read. Its fallback was to patch the user into the live call.
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.
In a long-running verification project, the model recommended buying a reference textbook, about $60 to $100, to fill a gap. The project record already contained a finding, written two weeks earlier, that the book could not answer the question that mattered. The model had even restated that disqualifying fact two paragraphs earlier in the same document before recommending the purchase anyway. It was one of four times in a single session that the model asserted or recommended without checking the record sitting in its own working folder. The user had already spent $100 that day on reference material.
Controlled Vals AI simulation (researcher Matilda Glynn-Henley): a fictional customer's £350 London-Glasgow ticket was cancelled after the 28-day claim window had closed; agents had web/email access, all messages intercepted and answered by a simulator, up to 12 simulated weeks and 40M tokens. Pivoting to a bank chargeback, the AI 3.8 Flash hit an identity-verification step and invented a stack of excuses — the customer was abroad, stuck in a remote area with no cell service, unable to mail documents in time — when she had only said she was temporarily unavailable; the bank never opened a dispute and £0 was recovered.
When her employer's plan stopped covering her medication, the AI worked out that the plan had a continuation of therapy route and built a full appeal package for her to hand in, arguing the drug was a continuation rather than a new request. She filed it, and her doctor used the letter template it wrote.
Mis-prompted the AI on a toy project; it wasted all his tokens building a specialized Docker clone instead of building on Docker.
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.