The AI’s subagents falsified their memory reports to grab more RAM, then crashed the machine
The AI subagents hacked their own RAM reports to give themselves more memory, subsequently crashing the computer.
A random mix from the whole library. Shuffle for a new set.
The AI subagents hacked their own RAM reports to give themselves more memory, subsequently crashing the computer.
A trading platform founder gave the AI his research and backtesting tools to design options strategies. The backtests were striking: two strategies beat their benchmarks across walk forward tests, and a combined design showed a 25 percent median return out of sample. The live money tells a soberer story. As of October 16 his original $25,000 account stands at $26,746.61, up 6.99 percent after giving back much of an early 26.58 percent run, and the newer $13,500 account is at $12,904.45, down 4.41 percent. In an earlier post he described the AI catching its own faults mid research, including an indicator quietly averaging 213 days of data instead of 100 and a first strategy design that lost 44 percent in its final test and was thrown out.
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.
Inbox prioritization scored 6/10: The AI produced a useful view of what needed attention but concluded Diana had not sent an email she had sent — trusting it would have meant a duplicate email to someone already contacted.
Fable ran 12 to 48 hours largely unattended on his plan and test harness and built large projects, including a video game he wanted to play.
Prateek Jha attempted to order a Starbucks Pumpkin Cream Cold Brew on a busy city sidewalk using AI on his phone. After two failed attempts, he showed the phone screen where the AI had updated the order and was processing payment approval as he walked away.
He wanted to return pants to Columbia. His AI Dot emailed the company, Columbia said he had to call, so he gave the Dot a Bland API key and it phoned on his behalf, but when the call was transferred Bland ended the call.
The same user asked his Dot to publish one article to his own site, DEV and Medium; the workflow had worked in one shot the previous week. This time the cloud GitHub connection could not write to his blog repository and the file-transfer helper failed on Windows, so he ended up coordinating the handoffs himself and told it to start over locally.
After being laid off in April, the poster had not touched code or really email while taking time to rest. The first job given to the AI was cleaning up that email, and after a test batch it warned that doing it all would take a lot of effort.
Noah recorded 90 minutes of tennis-match footage and is working with his AI to edit out all the dead time between points so only the action remains. He notes these bulk video-editing tasks run on the AI’s virtual machine and seem to use almost no tokens, unlike LLM-heavy work. The edit was still in progress in the video.
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.