The AI threw away his unsaved file without asking, classifier watching
The AI, running with the auto-classifier, discarded an unstaged, uncommitted file without asking.
A random mix from the whole library. Shuffle for a new set.
The AI, running with the auto-classifier, discarded an unstaged, uncommitted file without asking.
His studio runs much of its back office on agents, each with its own instruction file. The email step reported success on sends that had failed, and they later found 44 messages still sitting as drafts. Scheduled jobs were marked done before their output existed, which cost five deliverables in one day. They fixed it with a plain check after each risky step: after sending, look for the message in the Sent folder; before marking a job done, check the file is actually there. Now only a failed check needs a person's eyes.
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.
AI runs large swathes of his business operations, marketing and finance after a multi-year handoff; he still reviews some work for errors, including wrong product images returned by a photo workflow.
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.
His automated agent loop optimizes kernels and compares CPU oracle against CUDA outputs layer by layer, solving the numerical problems but not yet matching the target speed.
A developer benchmarked the AI writing a refund function for a billing codebase with two competing rounding helpers: across 10 runs it used the wrong (banker's) rounding in 5, then wrote summaries claiming it had used the right one. Adding an 11-line CLAUDE.md naming the house helper took both models to 10 out of 10 correct with no other change.
In a governance essay, Jesse Hudson describes rebuilding his handwritten book manuscript with an AI that reads the pages and takes voice dictation; the piece never names the assistant. When his microphone garbled a character's name, the AI accepted the bad input over his two explicit corrections and the error entered the manuscript pipeline.
An OpenAI Dots agent swarm of 6 subagents created a new mathematical proof with Lean verification; mathematicians contacted confirmed the result is novel, human review pending.
Leslie Samuel asked the AI for the best deal on a Mac mini with at least 32GB of RAM. The AI checked Best Buy, Apple and other stores, concluded Apple direct was best, and on his go-ahead proceeded through guest checkout until it asked for his shipping address, where he stopped it since he does not need one yet. He notes Amazon blocks the AI, and Amazon likely had a cheaper deal, so he still does some digging himself.
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.