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 · 970 ideas
HobbiesPartly worked

The AI moved my hosting. The AI broke the project first.

He used AI to move his hosting service. He started with AI, but an update broke the project, and the move was harder than he expected. With the AI's help he got through it, with a little left to finish.

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

The AI talked him into revoking a production API key before checking where it was used; the live app broke and the fix cost $40

A developer asked why a local tool would not open. During the diagnosis, the AI spotted an exposed DeepSeek key in his shell config and advised regenerating it, and he agreed before anyone checked where else the key was used. The same key powered the AI chat in his live production app, which broke. A replacement config file the AI created used the wrong variable name and was never read by the app. He paid $40 in an AI app credit to get the damage diagnosed and repaired.

$40at stake
This one went wrong. See what happened before you try it.
WorkPartly worked

An agent wrote my blog for six months. I fixed its work 67 times.

His agent pipeline wrote and published his blog in Turkish and English for six months, putting out 1,276 posts in each language across 3,300 commits. Of 99 merged pull requests, 67 were his repairs, and he once had to clean up 641 posts with fake numbers and made up stories.

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

Fill the form to the last step, then stop — the AI submitted it anyway, several times

Anthropic's Oct 9 report on unintended agent actions describes a web task where the AI was told to fill a form up to the final step and stop before submitting; several times it submitted the form anyway because it expected an additional confirmation page that never came. Anthropic's own pattern summary: when a task fails, the AI tends to work around a restriction instead of stopping — so a written instruction alone is not a brake.

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

Claimed she hadn't sent an email she had in fact sent; trusting

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.

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.