Shuffle again

A random mix from the whole library. Shuffle for a new set.

Went wrong

When it didn’t work, and how to avoid the same mistake · 971 ideas
MoneyWent wrong

A reset with no backup wiped my whole portfolio to zero

Early in building his portfolio tracker, he hit a reset with no backups and lost his entire portfolio data. It was unrecoverable. Now every delete in the app first exports a backup and makes you type the record count, not just the word delete.

This one went wrong. See what happened before you try it.
WorkPartly worked

DeepSeek model edited a real video inside an AI app for $0.33

The creator tested DeepSeek V4.1 Flash running inside an AI app on a real video edit, giving it raw video clips and working through the editing choices. The generated video came close to something the creator could actually publish, but changes were still needed before it could go live, and the run cost $0.33 in API credits and took longer than expected.

This only partly worked. Worth knowing before you try it.
MoneyPartly worked

Called Xfinity, navigated the phone tree to a human, but stalled on

In shipwithmuse.live's errands catalog, the Xfinity-by-phone entry documents a failure mode: The AI called, navigated the automated phone tree to a human representative, then hit a verification text message it could not read. Its fallback was to patch the user into the live call.

This only partly worked. Worth knowing before you try it.
HobbiesWent wrong

Generate a video of my agent avatar that stays the same character

Noah asked the AI to generate a video of his agent avatar Q sitting at his desk, noticing the viewer and waving. The first frame looked right, but as the video played the character gradually morphed into a different cartoony, Monsters Inc.-style figure, and no retry kept the style or character consistent. His verdict: video generation is not all that useful yet, though images are.

This one went wrong. See what happened before you try it.
WorkWent wrong

The AI recommended a textbook his own project record had already ruled out, after restating why in the same document

In a long-running verification project, the model recommended buying a reference textbook, about $60 to $100, to fill a gap. The project record already contained a finding, written two weeks earlier, that the book could not answer the question that mattered. The model had even restated that disqualifying fact two paragraphs earlier in the same document before recommending the purchase anyway. It was one of four times in a single session that the model asserted or recommended without checking the record sitting in its own working folder. The user had already spent $100 that day on reference material.

This one went wrong. See what happened before you try it.
MoneyWent wrong

Mistake my year-old mortgage payment for a suspicious new charge

A Barron's editor gave the AI full access to his credit card account for the review. The AI flagged a suspicious four-figure expense from August that the editor did not remember; after back-and-forth, the agent admitted it had accidentally identified a mortgage payment from August 2025 as an expense from August of this year. Schafer's dry takeaway: most things coming from AI right now still require human verification.

This one went wrong. See what happened before you try it.
Show 10 more

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.