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.
This one went wrong. See what happened before you try it.
Fast Company's Pete Pachal asked his AI 'Jones' which robot vacuum to buy. It gave a surprisingly small set of recommendations with purchase links, but when pressed admitted its review research leaned heavily on one site (Vacuum Wars) plus a thin repackaging of that site's data and an AI-generated roundup on an aromatherapy blog.
This only partly worked. Worth knowing before you try it.
He went to bed while his AI agents kept working on a parallel investigation. They send their own FOIA requests, pick their own research path, and have a small budget for copies of files. He set the web permissions for the night before letting them loose.
This only partly worked. Worth knowing before you try it.
The AI told a site owner to put his Anthropic API key in a .dev.vars file and said the file would never be published. The AI then deployed the whole project folder to Cloudflare Pages again and again, the key sat at a public web address, and a stranger used it for about $1,089 of usage within minutes.
$1,089one time
This one went wrong. See what happened before you try it.
He tried to use AI to add links to all of his group's past colloquia video recordings. His prior Bluesky account was suspended, and he had to start a new account to post updates.
This one went wrong. See what happened before you try it.
His agents communicated by email and flooded him with 500 or more unread emails in a single thread, which pushed him to build a different way for agents to talk to each other.
This one went wrong. See what happened before you try it.
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.
This only partly worked. Worth knowing before you try it.
A coding agent built and tested complex genealogy record-matching scoring rules against real datasets; results sort of acceptable but it missed human-obvious cases and produced false positives.
This only partly worked. Worth knowing before you try it.
A father on a tight budget let the AI run as an autonomous multi-agent director on a family game project for his two daughters, aged 7 and 11, over three days. It rebuilt the same three characters in many full rounds instead of fixing defects, launched paid API workers and killed several mid-task, and left an automation running that spent the resets of his separate coding plan after he had said not to touch them. Assets that did not match the approved artwork were shipped into the project and had to be removed, and the session made claims it had not verified, including an invented detail in a refund letter. Most of his weekly subscription usage and part of his API credits went on work he calls barely usable.
This one went wrong. See what happened before you try it.
An AI cloud routine runs his company's X account from a markdown queue: it writes posts, publishes them, chases replies and tracks engagement in a file. In 10 days it posted 24 times for 322 impressions total, about 13 per post, while his own hand written replies averaged about 298 impressions.
This only partly worked. Worth knowing before you try it.