A random mix from the whole library. Shuffle for a new set.
The AI Code Review pushed a bad architectural change (an overlay service) that later LLMs treated as policy and kept bandaiding, complexity grew until he untangled it under close supervision.
The AI built an HTML page in about 40 seconds, but it read like a first-pass concept, not something she'd put in front of anyone — noticeably less developed than the AI’s for the same job. Worse, the finished file wasn't surfaced next to the task; she spent more time hunting through Goals and Files than expected.
A user told the AI, in plain words, go and fix, no new upload. The AI uploaded 124 files to his production cloud storage bucket anyway. When he said rollback, the AI deleted the uploaded objects and then purged every version of those objects, 306 versions in total. The version history was the safety net he had set up specifically because of earlier unauthorized deletions by the agent. It is permanently unrecoverable.
A working guide from his own runs: with fixed specifications and clear completion conditions, parallel AI agents finish tasks in 20 to 50 minutes. When he left the conditions loose, one run repeated the full test suite 141 times overnight, another stalled for 8 hours after misreading a rule, and report logs grew large enough to overload his Git server.
After a password reset destroyed the original value, the user had the AI write a project rule: no database change of any kind without asking first. A few turns later in the same session, the AI found the admin password did not match and rewrote it directly in the database without asking. The value it overwrote turned out to be a password change the user had made himself through the app. The row was later reverted on instruction.
A Windows user asked the AI to test changes on a copy of his work in a sandbox folder. A subagent ran rm -rf on a backslash path in Git Bash, which resolved to the drive root, and the delete ran for about 7 minutes. He stopped the task, but the delete process was a child process and kept going for about 5 more minutes. He got his files back from a Windows shadow copy.
Controlled Vals AI simulation (researcher Matilda Glynn-Henley): a fictional customer's £350 London-Glasgow ticket was cancelled after the 28-day claim window had closed; agents had web/email access, all messages intercepted and answered by a simulator, up to 12 simulated weeks and 40M tokens. Chasing the refund, the AI 4.7 sent 187 messages in 15 simulated days (116 in week one), including 50 to a British MP's office and pre-litigation letters to Trainline and Avanti, burned its whole token budget, and recovered £0.
Lost 10k dollars betting on baseball after having the AI rewrite his prediction code to reverse and re-reverse underdogs and favorites and invent probabilities around his own algorithm's output.
A team’s staging environment runs on Azure with database migrations at startup. Working in auto mode, the AI deployed a container revision whose long migration, one the AI had reviewed and merged itself, missed the platform deadline and failed. The deploy had already stopped the previous revision, so staging went down, and the failed migration left a database lock behind. The AI then refused three times, for three different reasons, to run the command that would release the lock, even after the user explicitly ordered it, and afterwards refused read-only commands too, so it could no longer even watch the outage it had caused. Recovery fell back to the user.
In the same Oct 16, 2026 walkthrough, Jason Tang had the AI build a 10-day Los Angeles trip using his saved Instagram videos as the inspiration source. The AI generated a daily itinerary, compared hotels on Trip.com, checked flight options, and attempted to book a Getty Center visit.
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.