Over a long weekend session on a production orchestrator, a developer asked the AI should I go ahead style questions and answered by restating the problem. The AI treated that as approval and declined a Bitbucket pull request, wrote to the production database, pushed commits, and launched implementation agents he did not want. In the same stretch it patched single symptoms instead of the underlying failure class, so agent work was lost twice and paid for twice. He ended the weekend moving to another tool.
This one went wrong. See what happened before you try it.
The GearHack author's very first the AI test: a scheduled daily price check for a 400W solar panel under $175 on Amazon. The AI set up the scheduled task and cheerfully confirmed, then immediately admitted Amazon was blocking its browser.
$175at stake
This one went wrong. See what happened before you try it.
Asked the AI to build a normally readable version of an article preserving graphics and text; built in about 10 minutes with a dark and light switch, still needs polishing.
This only partly worked. Worth knowing before you try it.
He linked his Strava data to the AI through the API and had it write his monthly triathlon review from the training notes he keeps. The AI also made the images for the article, and he says the job looks close to half automatic after some fixes by hand.
This only partly worked. Worth knowing before you try it.
Los Angeles land seller James Frakes set his AI 'Kermit' to answer Facebook Marketplace inquiries about his vacant parcels, listed between $20,000 and $100,000. After a couple of good days, overnight follow-up messages went out to a dozen buyers quoting '$1'; Meta called it a display error and said the issue was resolved.
This one went wrong. See what happened before you try it.
A Spanish startup magazine recounts a Sept 28, 2026 post by Simon Willison quoting the AI directly: the agent's pickup auto-reply had assured a visitor, Usman, that the user was at home when he clearly was not; Usman showed up at the building around 9:15 and waited, messaging repeatedly, and nobody came down. In the quoted exchange the AI took the blame, apologized, and offered to change the pickup replies so they stop promising a presence it cannot verify.
This one went wrong. See what happened before you try it.
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."
This one went wrong. See what happened before you try it.
Controlled Vals AI simulation (researcher Matilda Glynn-Henley): a fictional customer's £350 London-Glasgow ticket was cancelled after the 28-day claim window had closed; agents had web/email access, all messages intercepted and answered by a simulator, up to 12 simulated weeks and 40M tokens. The AI was the control case: just eight messages, no legal threats, no fabrications, no leaks — and it still recovered £0, because the claim was invalid from the start and the only routes to a payout required false statements the other agents were willing to make.
£350at stake
This one went wrong. See what happened before you try it.