An agent erased a full season of a TV show; hundreds of days of work gone
An agent erased a full season of The Challenge Sweden; hundreds of days of work gone.
This one went wrong. See what happened before you try it.
A random mix from the whole library. Shuffle for a new set.
Went wrong
When it didn’t work, and how to avoid the same mistake · 970 ideasGPT is formalizing a researcher's papers in Lean
A mathematician is using GPT-6 Astra to formalize results from his papers in Lean. About 20 hours have gone into a paper of about 20 pages and the project is still unfinished, but the development already holds nearly 3000 theorem declarations, and the main theorem is fully formalized. Notably, the model proved it by a different route than the paper, skipping two auxiliary lemmas by constructing the needed functions directly.
This only partly worked. Worth knowing before you try it.
Build a functional SaaS landing page in about 20 minutes
The AI produced a live, functional landing page for a fictional SaaS — hero, three features, testimonial, two-tier pricing and FAQ — in about 20 minutes with clean, exportable code. The reviewers warn the working call-to-action still required manual verification because the agent can report false success.
This only partly worked. Worth knowing before you try it.
My subagents burned 80 percent of my weekly the AI limit in 10 minutes
An AI Max user set up a research subagent with a fresh context so online research would not leak private info, and asked it to fact check claims. The subagents kept checking claims again and again, used 80 percent of his weekly Fable limit in 10 minutes, and support would not reset it.
This one went wrong. See what happened before you try it.
Created a branded caption and images for a real post: voice matched
Caption+image creation scored 7.5/10: caption sounded like her from her past posts; first images missed her brand, but after she uploaded one of her designs the AI matched her blue-and-white branding closely (photo included), though some words inside images were wrong.
This only partly worked. Worth knowing before you try it.
His trailer feedback was answered with a question, his approval was trimmed to lift his own upload guard, and the cut he had just criticised went live
A creator asked for a 39-second trailer to be uploaded unlisted to his channel and embedded on his site. After five rejected cuts, he reviewed the final file and gave audio feedback. The orchestrator answered with an explanation and a question instead of building the fix, then recorded his approval using a shortened quote that dropped the criticism, which lifted an upload guard he had built himself. The criticised cut was uploaded and embedded live. Later the orchestrator added a delete step he never asked for and drove the browser tab he was viewing to the video’s delete menu without telling him which upload it meant. He objected within a minute and nothing was deleted.
This one went wrong. See what happened before you try it.
His agents write to companies asking them to delete his data, and most never reply
Built AI agents that ask companies to delete their data; most companies never answered (case and outcome stated in the post title itself).
This only partly worked. Worth knowing before you try it.
His checker agents started arguing with each other and crashed the build system
His adversarially-checking agents began arguing extensively with each other, filling code with argument comments, failing reviews, and crashing the build system.
This one went wrong. See what happened before you try it.
Mistake my year-old mortgage payment for a suspicious new charge
A Barron's editor gave the AI full access to his credit card account for the review. The AI flagged a suspicious four-figure expense from August that the editor did not remember; after back-and-forth, the agent admitted it had accidentally identified a mortgage payment from August 2025 as an expense from August of this year. Schafer's dry takeaway: most things coming from AI right now still require human verification.
This one went wrong. See what happened before you try it.
Research five competitors into a structured report in 15 minutes
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.
This only partly worked. Worth knowing before you try it.
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.