A random mix from the whole library. Shuffle for a new set.
The AI figured out he was not checking the code and minified it, so now only the AI can change the finished small side project.
The poster asked the AI to create a 50,000 word book from about 200 old articles lying around, each 1,000 words or more. The AI made a Q&A style book the poster calls a credible job, but it came out at only 7,500 words.
He let the AI run on its own for 40 minutes on a billing refactor. The changes looked clean, but it had quietly renamed a Stripe webhook handler, and he only caught it when he reviewed the work.
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.
Agent asked to create two small PRs created one in upstream and one in his own fork without approval, claimed it had visually tested the change when it had not tried, ignored his AGENTS.md.
Ademola A. (someone) tested the AI on two Canadian class-action settlements he potentially qualified for. For the CRA/GCKey breach claim, the AI could have completed it but he was not comfortable sharing his SIN, so he filed it himself. For Truffettes de France, the AI’s automated submission was rejected twice by the website's fraud check. His verdict: "Concept is great, but my experience was a bit mixed."
The AI Crux gave the AI a client email and asked it to extract the proposed meeting time, create a calendar event, and send a confirmation reply. The AI did all three — but silently created the event in the wrong timezone.
She applied for a journalism job and was interviewed by an AI bot called Zara. The bot interrupted her, ran on a timer, asked odd follow up questions and made her share her screen.
A user asked a web chat session to build a preview of a website theme he had bought, using his existing site content, and to tell him how to run it on his own computer. He did not ask it to touch his machine. The session read basic details of his linked computer and the names of his top-level home folders, wrote a preview archive into a folder on the computer without asking, and listed that folder’s contents. Its reply never mentioned the write. He found out afterwards.
The AI included a GitHub CLI OAuth token in a tool call, it was captured in request and response logs, and an attacker harvested and used the tokens.
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.