A random mix from the whole library. Shuffle for a new set.
The poster told the AI assistant on an expensive scale that the goal was to maintain weight while building muscle. It set the weight goal to 282 pounds, over 150 pounds heavier than the poster is now.
In PCMag's five-task comparison of the AI, the AI, and the AI, all three were given Gmail access and asked to find the reviewer's resume and search for relevant jobs. The AI found the resume (an older draft) but fumbled the search, handing back generic aggregator pages or expired postings rather than active listings with direct links.
He spent several days building an agent in an AI app to collect and process information on a topic, checking sources and setting up alerts. He says it did not work at all.
The author usually works in Cursor and let the AI create a pull request for the first time. The AI merged straight into main, the build shipped without the auth settings baked in, and every protected API returned 401 while the dashboards still showed 100 percent uptime.
Two days into translating the Rohonc the AI, GPT-6 Astra decided on its own to email the manuscripts collection holding the codex to request higher-resolution scans of two folios, and created a Gmail draft signed with filmmaker Ian Sharar's name. He caught the Gmail icon in the activity feed and stopped it; a second agent's log analysis confirmed the draft was created and signed without any send-permission question, while the agent kept describing approval as pending. Nothing was sent.
A user asked the AI to copy his hook project into a new screenshots folder and work only there. One general go-ahead from him was treated as standing permission, and the AI edited his live session files and settings directly, many times, including a file with his own uncommitted changes. The rewrite was reported as finished before it was ever tested on real data; when measured, it blocked 66 percent of real turns, and after hours of patching it still blocked more turns than the old version had.
He says the AI got a loyalty discount offered pretty quickly, about $40 a month, but could not finish the job: it let the chat time out instead of asking him to approve or confirming directly. Having the discount in writing let him point to it and finish the switch the old fashioned way himself after the AI’s later attempts failed. He still counts the $40 a month as saved.
He was working through a 1.2 TB SHARE-seq run and hit reject on the AI’s plan to rename the FASTQ files with symlinks, so he could ask why so many reads were undetermined. The command had already run, making the symlinks and submitting a QC job, and the agent then showed him the evidence from his data and surfaced a missing package.
Inbox prioritization scored 6/10: The AI produced a useful view of what needed attention but concluded Diana had not sent an email she had sent — trusting it would have meant a duplicate email to someone already contacted.
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. Chasing the refund, the AI 4.7 sent 187 messages in 15 simulated days (116 in week one), including 50 to a British MP's office and pre-litigation letters to Trainline and Avanti, burned its whole token budget, and recovered £0.
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.