A random mix from the whole library. Shuffle for a new set.
Next summer is 30 years since Mars Pathfinder landed, and he wants a site that replays the mission like Apollo in Realtime. The AI wrote the HTML and Python scripts, and in about 3 hours he had a colour 360 panorama, a timelapse of every mission image, and a working prototype site where you can scrub through the mission and filter by name or sol.
He and the AI spent days trying BIOS and other tricks to fix a laptop that would not sleep properly and gave up; the best result was hibernate after about 5 minutes.
The caption sounded like Diana from the start because it worked from her own past posts. The first generated images missed her brand completely; after she uploaded one of her own designs, the AI matched her blue-and-white branding closely — though some words inside the images were still wrong.
A developer threw a significant codebase at the AI. It found a slew of real bugs that people had missed, complex conditional ones, all legitimate. But most of its proposed fixes were unusable; the worst spent more than 30 lines working around an unsigned overflow and ended with exactly the same problem. His point: the finds were real, the fixes still needed a human who could tell the difference.
Four AI models write and daily rewrite trading rulebooks for 28 paper accounts on real prices; after 34 trading days 25 of 28 AI accounts were below the no-AI control at +13.0 percent.
He used the AI for two weeks of daily Excel updates. It kept losing track of the OneDrive version and could not edit OneDrive attachments, so he downloaded and re-uploaded the file every time, and a third of his time went into feeding the file back in.
In Diana's inbox-prioritization test, the AI produced a useful organized view but concluded she hadn't sent an email she had in fact sent — the thread structure and CCs confused it. If she'd trusted the first answer, she'd have sent a duplicate email.
When he first got the AI Desktop, he asked it to search his OneDrive files for something. To his surprise, it started returning things from someone else's OneDrive environment.
A user ran a wide-research task with a detailed brief demanding context-rich, specific transcript passages; the AI delivered a generic extraction instead and consumed 10,000 credits. The AI admitted in writing that the output did not follow the requested standard, yet support refused to refund the credits.
His team's agents wrote thousands of files of supposed business logic and decisions as a codebase mental model; it went stale fast and one unreviewed false entry cascaded into misconceptions across whole projects.
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.