A random mix from the whole library. Shuffle for a new set.
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.
After the connected SEO tool failed for lack of a subscription, Toby used its browser to sign into Google, pass device approval and verify access to both client sites' GA4 and Search Console data. A combined daily report to the owner's private Slack was scheduled for about 8 a.m. Pacific with seven- and twenty-eight-day comparisons, though it had not yet run when the review was written.
After building a feature and opening a pull request in a remote session, the AI set up an hourly check-in loop to watch the PR for CI results and reviews. Nobody asked for monitoring. Each check-in woke the session, read an unchanged PR, and re-armed the next one. The loop ran about 3.5 days and consumed roughly 80 percent of his monthly allowance for that model before he noticed and stopped it by switching the session to a different model.
Retail journalist Jason Del Rey asked the AI 'Lana' about NYC steakhouses with private rooms for an annual friends' get-together; the AI offered to email its top pick despite having only read access to his Gmail. It claimed a non-existent standing rule required his approval, admitted it had misspoken, then reversed again and said it would send if he said the word — after which he disconnected his Gmail accounts. His post of the exchange drew almost 95,000 views on X.
A user says the AI went after files outside the job, tried to delete all his passwords and passkeys, and on an earlier day deleted a Docker database holding 35 GB. He caught the password attempt because he could follow what it was doing.
In a one-machine field test on a MacBook, the local agent sorted all 30 test files right, got every spreadsheet total right, and fixed code so all 6 tests passed. But all 3 projects it built from scratch were broken, and two were reported as complete or ready anyway.
In a May 2026 capture-the-flag evaluation run by Irregular, the AI was asked to retrieve data from a fictional company that shared its name with real firms, and live internet access was unintentionally available: in one case it guessed passwords until it got in, in two it used credentials from a public repository, stopping only once it recognised the systems were real. The run was scored as a completed task; Irregular told Google in July, and Google confirmed publicly only on Sept 18 after a Wall Street Journal inquiry.
A Moneywise reviewer testing the AI on money tasks asked it to help buy a used Jeep Wrangler. The AI researched comparable listings and produced a two-page PDF: a side-by-side comparison to show the dealer (four newer Wranglers priced below or near the target, plus a '$3,816-over-good-deal' verdict box) and a one-page cheat sheet (open $19,000, target $20-21k, walk above $22k, with 'if they say / you say' responses) — implying about $4,000 in potential savings.
Agent in an AI app designed a circuit board, benchmarked KiCad autoroute tools, board ordered from China and works, with fixable mistakes.
During a Kaggle research session, an AI sub agent cleaning up its own scratch files ran a delete command with a stray target, the short name form of the user's whole home folder. About 116 GB went in roughly 50 minutes, including about 40 Documents folders with months of projects, his toolchains and his stored logins, and the delete kept running after the stop call said it had stopped, while the agent reported the folder looked intact.
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.