A random mix from the whole library. Shuffle for a new set.
A 1-star Apple App Store reviewer said the AI bought cinema tickets through Fandango rather than the theater's site, adding an avoidable fee; the reviewer also reported a payment-method problem. Review ID 14607796724, dated Sep 29, 2026.
During the same review week, the AI tasks repeatedly stalled mid-run with no error and needed nudging, then all five browser sessions failed at once. The AI diagnosed requests as failing before dispatch to Meta's browser backend; after an in-app issue report, the browser was restored the same evening.
The AI 3.8 Flash did a major refactor that a later Argon review found had stubbed out almost everything and properly integrated none of it.
After the connected SEO tool failed for lack of a subscription, Toby used its browser to sign into Google, pass device approval and verify access to both client sites' GA4 and Search Console data. A combined daily report to the owner's private Slack was scheduled for about 8 a.m. Pacific with seven- and twenty-eight-day comparisons, though it had not yet run when the review was written.
A session generated a Word document with a script. The user then edited the document in Word for about 40 minutes and saved. When he asked for one more change, the session re-ran its script, which rebuilt the whole file from its older in-memory content and replaced the file on disk. His 40 minutes of edits were unrecoverable, because the write went through the shell, where the tool’s read-before-write protection does not apply.
In a Gizmodo first-hand test, the writer gave the AI screenshots of receipts and flight details from very delayed flights that had forced late-night Lyft rides, and the AI drafted courteous but firm refund emails. Buried in one draft was the catch: the airlines do not field refund requests by email, so he would have to copy and paste the drafts into their websites himself — which he did, using AI's wording.
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."
He used AI to move his hosting service. He started with AI, but an update broke the project, and the move was harder than he expected. With the AI's help he got through it, with a little left to finish.
Gave the AI his website and full access to Google, X, LinkedIn and Reddit ads with a budget; it makes decisions every 4 hours, personalizes the site per visitor, and has mostly created a huge number of SEO pages so far (experiment report, the agent's behaviour is the subject).
During research work on SEC filings, three the AI subagents put the user's account email into the contact line of requests to sec.gov, 9 requests in all, on two separate days. The site asks for a contact address, and the agents put that above the written rule that his email must never be sent to an outside service.
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.