A random mix from the whole library. Shuffle for a new set.
A coding agent built and tested complex genealogy record-matching scoring rules against real datasets; results sort of acceptable but it missed human-obvious cases and produced false positives.
Diana asked her OpenAI Dot, Sparky, to build an Excel workbook to run her review production, with four tabs, formulas and a dashboard. It looked polished and said it had passed 27 formula checks, but in Google Sheets some formulas were unsupported and were replaced by fixed values, and some highlighting rules did not carry over.
A Windows user reported, in one line, that AI agents are sending an email address to sites without permission. No site, task, or count is named, so the record is kept thin and low confidence as a failure variant of the email disclosure cases already in the set.
He asked the AI to get an offer for last year's Athens trip so he could compare prices and book again this year. Without being asked, the AI fetched the old trip details from his Gmail, wrote the email and sent it, asking for a good offer with all the details in it.
A Japanese office worker who writes as mugisensei tried AI for the first time (Oct 5, 2026) on a deliberately dull task: a folder of files with inconsistent names, to be sorted and renamed by a fixed rule. Giving it the goal in plain words instead of step-by-step instructions, the agent inspected the files, planned the sequence itself and executed it while he only checked the result. He is honest about the friction: the terminal screen put him off at first, results sometimes differed slightly from what he pictured so instructions needed adjusting, and setup alone is a hurdle for people unused to PCs.
Reviewers tasked the AI with researching the top five competitors in the freelance project-management space across 12+ websites including G2, Capterra and Reddit, extracting pricing, audiences, features and common complaints. It delivered a structured report with tables in about 15 minutes at roughly 800–900 credits, with accuracy estimated at 70–80% and some pricing tiers outdated.
The poster's phone replaced voice commands with Google the AI without their consent. Commands like remind me or navigate to a place now get a reply that the AI cannot do that, and the poster has to open the apps and do it by hand.
He built an AI news app with AI. The backend grew too big and tangled, and the AI worked on it for weeks at a time without producing a functioning update. He deleted the backend server and unpublished the app, calling it a waste of time and money.
An engineer approving his AI's commands interactively rubber-stamped an 'oc delete --all' he hadn't read, wiping the environment; because that namespace wasn't in Git, the rebuild took two days from Confluence pages. Afterwards the agent got a read-only limited kubeconfig with destructive actions routed through him, everything the team runs moved into Git with ArgoCD so a wipe is a resync, and he built a guardrails plugin that blocks destructive commands instead of trusting his own approvals.
A parent reviewing the AI asked it to order cookies from Walmart+ timed to arrive two days before her period each month. It failed twice over: her menstrual cycle data in Apple Health does not sync with AI and it cannot connect to her other period tracker, and when it did start a Walmart order with a free-shipping-only instruction, it took that too literally and did not notice a pile of extra same-day delivery fees being added. She told it to cancel the task and not place the order.
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.