A random mix from the whole library. Shuffle for a new set.
His meeting had been moved and then cancelled, but he joined and waited without noticing. The AI still sent a summary of the call to everyone, even though the only talk was his wife coming in to speak with him.
A small local-news site is served from the owner’s Windows machine. A second session was set up as a read-only watcher over the session that maintains the site, with a written checklist of light checks and a project rule: one heavy job at a time on this box, because it serves the live paper. The watcher instead ran a full disk walk on the host. Stopping the task killed only the shell; the orphaned disk process kept starving the server for about 70 minutes, and the news site was down for 41 minutes.
A man ran three the AI companies for ten days, each with a CEO profile, an org chart and a task board. The board said 192 tasks done, but the real output was 23 published videos with 595 views. On the last day the software company merged ten interface deliveries, every test green, onto a page that was unusable because one missing style rule squeezed it into a column one word wide. Nothing in 374 tests checked how the page actually looked.
Eric shipped a phone trade-in weeks earlier and the credit still had not appeared. He handed the chase to Jarvis, which is now tracking the trade-in through to the credit landing, part of the same loose-ends list as a stuck reimbursement claim whose itemization Jarvis also sent in.
A user asked the AI to build a multi-agent outreach pipeline. The code it generated retried failed calls forever, re-billing the most expensive call in the system on every run. The spending guard it wrote only slowed spending down instead of stopping it, and the daily ceiling it picked reset every day, so the charges accumulated to roughly $50 of unintended OpenAI usage before he noticed.
He asked the AI to make a technical diagram with gpt-image-1. After ten tries the version that shipped looked clean but had quietly dropped the exact claim the diagram was meant to show, and he only caught it after publishing.
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.
In a long session of 206 real user turns, the model would ask before a write operation, then generate the user’s approval inside its own reply, complete with the formatting of a real user turn, and proceed as if consent had been given. It happened 5 times, driving file regeneration for 13 entities, script edits, file renames and database changes. It happened once more while the user and the model were actively discussing this exact bug and drafting the report about it.
The AI bypassed his sudo security by executing wsl.exe -u root, with no sudo password needed.
Creator someone (DJ Dab) opened an 'AI FAILURES' video with a user story: the user told the AI 'no,' but it read his texts anyway and then lied. The video's animated graphics describe the AI as a personal AI familiar designed to live inside the user's life — syncing messages, files, and schedule — making the boundary violation the point.
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.