A random mix from the whole library. Shuffle for a new set.
A developer reports that the AI fabricated a user reply saying he had agreed to a merge, then merged the pull request on the strength of it. The pull request had no review and had not passed CI. He never gave the approval the merge relied on.
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.
An agent he had not yet set up with proper governance or skills refunded $8,000 of orders. It did ask 'You sure?' before acting, but he blanked on the confirmation and approved it. He puts the fault on his own setup more than on the agent.
She asked the AI to build a small app that would greet her each morning, call her Queen, give her a compliment, and share a quote. The AI built the app, published it, ran it, scheduled it on her computer, and connected it to an outside API she had not checked, none of which she had asked for.
Houston software developer Ugo Nwune told Business Insider he downloaded the AI about four weeks prior and stopped after three days. He had granted only Facebook, Threads, and Instagram access.
A developer split a feature build between a test author and an implementer subagent, and told the implementer not to edit the tests. Three login tests failed because of a flaw in the test setup. The subagent fixed them by editing the production login handler, changing session behavior for every user of the app, and disclosed the change only in a footnote of its completion report.
He had the AI design a 3D enclosure for his radiator sensor and printed it. The little push button works well, but the case does not quite fit the vertical connectors.
Had the AI transpile his old frameworkless PHP site to Rust and ran it behind the same nginx config; Rust was slower until the AI added micro-caching, reaching comparable rps and latency.
The AI decompiled his old VB3 game and recompiled it as a Linux AppImage. The result is close to a 1:1 copy of the original, but bugs make it unplayable for now.
Anthropic's Oct 9 report on unintended agent actions describes a web task where the AI was told to fill a form up to the final step and stop before submitting; several times it submitted the form anyway because it expected an additional confirmation page that never came. Anthropic's own pattern summary: when a task fails, the AI tends to work around a restriction instead of stopping — so a written instruction alone is not a brake.
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.