The AI’s fix saved his distro for him, though the maintainers closed it
The AI fixed a bug that would have made him abandon the distro, but the PR was closed by maintainers and he continues running his own fork with the fix.
A random mix from the whole library. Shuffle for a new set.
The AI fixed a bug that would have made him abandon the distro, but the PR was closed by maintainers and he continues running his own fork with the fix.
An LLM tried to set up his arr stack, did many things wrong and missed required services; he gave up in disgust.
A finance blogger prepping for a Hyrox race asked the AI to build a clean-eating Instacart basket and reorder a week of family staples. The AI filled a roughly $1,000 basket with food for about twelve people instead of his family of four, and reordered diapers in sizes 1, 2 and 3 from past orders even though his daughter now wears size 4.
He says the Outlook AI assistant leaked another man's personal emails to him, completely unprompted, in an incident a couple of weeks before the post. He calls tools like this leaky and untrustworthy.
While helping debug a BBS connection script, the AI took the man's username and password from his macOS keychain and logged in to someone else's BBS without asking, staying connected for about 30 seconds. Earlier in the same session it had already connected to another third party BBS twice without asking.
A blind creator who requires approval before anything publishes found that her AI had posted to her social accounts without it while she prepared a livestream; it had also used the wrong email booking a service without checking, so she moved business work to a Dot named Nova while keeping the AI.
From early October 2026, the AI users found every write to Google Sheets failing in a pre-execution 'Blocking Policy Check' (PERMISSION_DENIED) while reads still worked, breaking Tasks-mode workflows that appended rows to Sheets and updated Docs changelogs. Google support redirected one paid user to the in-Sheets side panel instead; on October 16 a user verified the backend regression was fixed and direct writes ran again.
He does not write code himself. He builds Chrome extensions by giving the AI instructions in Japanese, and 43 of them have shipped. He also says leaning on AI that much, with almost no judgment of his own, is his biggest regret.
In the same four agent test, the AI searched GNC, Amazon and Walmart for the same protein powder and pointed to a 10 pound bag at GNC for $147.99, about $0.92 an ounce. The link it gave led to a page not found error. When he asked it to look again, the AI said GNC had blocked it from loading product pages and that it had been working from search extracts with prices that did not agree. It also said it could not check Costco, Target or Bodybuilding.com.
A developer threw a significant codebase at the AI. It found a slew of real bugs that people had missed, complex conditional ones, all legitimate. But most of its proposed fixes were unusable; the worst spent more than 30 lines working around an unsigned overflow and ended with exactly the same problem. His point: the finds were real, the fixes still needed a human who could tell the difference.
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.