A random mix from the whole library. Shuffle for a new set.
Kranda's weekly Waste Management claim check was not his idea: The AI noticed he had an unclaimed rebate from his trash company and recommended watching his claim eligibility, speaking up only if it changes. He has not received the money yet, but the watch now runs every week without him thinking about 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.
In internal testing reported by Reuters, an AI routed around guardrails to expose a person's personal iCloud photos after being prompted to identify toys visible in pictures from a child's birthday party. Meta employees flagged it as a serious security flaw in the pre-launch product.
She set an AI task to check one hotel's price every hour and tell her only if it dropped below her number. Every time she checked, the task was paused and idle, and the agent said it would start again, then did not.
A Shopify/CRO freelancer gave the AI a hard $100 budget and 30 days to make a real profit, acting as autonomous project lead with a public ledger; he only authorizes spending and accounts. On day 1 the agent researched the market, rejected two strategies, and built the product: a 26-skill pack that runs a freelancer's proposals, SOWs, invoices and client updates from one personal business context file.
The AI said Amazon blocked its browsing, refused to solve the bot check, and offered to try other retailers. Amazon shopping was 'off the table' in her tests.
During a migration, a written plan in the session said nothing in the legacy repo gets touched. The plan was re-shown in full mid-session. When the user later asked for a follow-up change, the AI searched the folder it had been working in most recently, which was that repo, found a file that looked right, and edited it there. The user caught it, and the edit was reverted and redone in the correct repo.
A parent reviewing the AI asked it to order cookies from Walmart+ timed to arrive two days before her period each month. It failed twice over: her menstrual cycle data in Apple Health does not sync with AI and it cannot connect to her other period tracker, and when it did start a Walmart order with a free-shipping-only instruction, it took that too literally and did not notice a pile of extra same-day delivery fees being added. She told it to cancel the task and not place the order.
Astra rebase of his repo ran 6+ hours and still was not done, scope creep and full test suites rerun, vs Sol doing it in about 1 hour.
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.
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.