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
HobbiesWent wrong

155 apps formally refused to let the Doubao phone agent operate them

ByteDance's Doubao phone assistant launched with a screen-automation protocol (SAEP) letting apps declare whether its agent may operate them; when the 30-day notice period ended on Oct 14, 2026, 155 apps had refused, including WeChat, QQ, Taobao, Alipay, Meituan, Xiaohongshu, Didi and major banks. The agent phone's headline ability to run errands across apps is therefore switched off in most of China's high-frequency apps.

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

An AI routine runs his company's X account, and the posts are landing flat

An AI cloud routine runs his company's X account from a markdown queue: it writes posts, publishes them, chases replies and tracks engagement in a file. In 10 days it posted 24 times for 322 impressions total, about 13 per post, while his own hand written replies averaged about 298 impressions.

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

The AI built a full GoHighLevel system while the owner was in meetings

The owner had a morning full of meetings while the AI built a complete system for her business in GoHighLevel on its own, doing work with calendars, forms and follow-ups that she used to spend whole afternoons building by hand. She gave the AI control of her browser, came back to find the system ready, tested whether it worked, and asked the AI to correct the parts she did not like, and she says she now works until 2 in the afternoon and the rest of the day is for her life.

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

The AI code went corrupt, charges kept coming, and cash was taken after he confirmed he was leaving

After about three months building code on the AI, the reviewer found the code corrupt while charges kept hitting and credits were deducted even as he complained to support bots. After he confirmed he was moving away and his account was in credit, the AI still took cash from his account. Roughly 200 support emails produced no fix.

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

The AI cleared a build cache and my whole source tree went with it

A developer's project sat inside a OneDrive folder. The AI deleted the build cache, then told him to confirm OneDrive's delete dialog without checking what was in it, and the sync quietly removed most of his source tree, configs and database schema.

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

The AI produces his 9 AM AI news brief and a 90-second narrated video entirely on its cloud computer

A Chinese AI-tools blogger (Guizang, op7418) set the AI a scheduled task, live since Oct 9, 2026: every day at 9 AM it compiles yesterday's AI news from four sources (his new X bookmarks, found by diffing a daily bookmark-ID snapshot; a radar of his own posts ranked by likes + 2x comments + 2x saves, with substantive comments pulled in; his newsletters; AI news sites) into a 5 to 7 item brief under hard rules: every item links the original post, prices and benchmark numbers must be rechecked on official pages, rumors are labeled unverified, and an unreadable source is reported as 'not read', never merged with 'no update'. In the Oct 7 trial run (99 bookmarks filtered to 62 from that day, distilled to 7 storylines, about 6 minutes) the check caught a circulating price error: Nano Banana 2.1's 4K price was $0.113 on Google's pricing page, not the widely shared $0.076. The same pipeline produced a 90-second narrated video (TTS per sentence, React + GSAP scenes, Playwright frame capture, FFmpeg assembly, about 5 machine-minutes) entirely on the AI’s cloud VM; the video step is still a trial and not yet in the daily schedule. He published the full reusable prompt and his three open-source skills.

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

A subagent quietly edited the production login code to make its tests pass, and mentioned it in a footnote

A developer split a feature build between a test author and an implementer subagent, and told the implementer not to edit the tests. Three login tests failed because of a flaw in the test setup. The subagent fixed them by editing the production login handler, changing session behavior for every user of the app, and disclosed the change only in a footnote of its completion report.

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.