Skip to main content

NOPE · AI and people

AI incidents

Reports of AI-related harm and adverse experiences affecting people’s safety, wellbeing, rights and livelihoods. Explore what happened and the evidence available.

NOPE’s core concern is when AI communicates with a person, acts on their behalf, or depicts or impersonates them. The tracker also records consequential decisions, claims and privacy harms involving AI. Each case needs a described connection between AI use and the harm, including private information recorded into or disclosed to an AI service. Each account is reviewed for publication; claims may remain uncorroborated or disputed. How we review and count cases

In this selection

Published cases
4
Countries with reported events
2
Located 3 of 4 cases · 1 unknown
Languages in checked sources
2
Recorded for 4 of 4 cases

These figures describe the cases collected by NOPE. Coverage varies with discovery, reporting and available evidence. They do not estimate how often AI-related harm occurs.

Response counts currently use each case’s principal recorded outcome. Further proceedings may be described in its account.

Cases in this selection, counted once in their first known event year. A series may continue beyond that year. Reporting and collection dates are excluded. NOPE has searched recent events more thoroughly than earlier years, so bar heights also reflect collection effort.

Reported severity MediumLow
More filters: AI relation, use, setting, sources and responses
Clear filters

4 of 1101 published cases

Jul 2026Event location unknownGrok (reported)

TV presenter Katie Piper says an X user asked Grok to 'fix her face' and others shared AI versions of how she 'should' look; she publicly objected

In an Instagram post on 15 July 2026, TV presenter and campaigner Katie Piper, who has a visible difference from injuries in a 2008 attack, shared a screenshot of an X user asking Grok to 'fix her face and show me how would she look normal', shown beside the image Grok produced. She wrote that someone had uploaded a photo of her to Grok with that request and that since then she had been repeatedly tagged in a thread where people debated her appearance and shared AI-generated versions of what she 'should' look like; PinkNews reports comments in the thread calling her ugly. She said she was okay and was not posting for reassurance, but asked what happens when such content is aimed at a teenager or someone newly injured, and what happens when AI decides what normal looks like. PinkNews reports that the X user appears to have deleted the post after a backlash. BBC Wales cited her post in October 2026 and said the team behind Grok did not respond to its request for comment.

Core concern Low reported severity Media Coverage

AI involvement reported · Causal attribution alleged · 4 sources, 2 underlying accounts · Added 29/10/2026

9 Oct 2026CanadaUnidentified image tool (suspected)

Nova Scotia woman says duct cleaners showed her an "after" photo of work she found undone; examiners for Global News found an AI watermark on it

A woman in Dartmouth, Nova Scotia, told Global News that a duct-cleaning crew she booked through a Facebook Marketplace advert came to her home on 9 October 2026, showed her a phone photo of a dirty furnace motor, raised the price to $300 and then showed her a photo of a motor that looked almost new as proof the job was done. When she checked after the crew left, she says, the motor was still dirty. An AI researcher at the University at Buffalo and two students, examining the photos for Global News, found a Google SynthID watermark on the clean-motor photo; the researcher said the AI detector Sightengine gave it a 99 per cent AI score and called the result their strongest evidence that the image may come from AI. She says the company denied wrongdoing and refunded her only after repeated complaints; Halifax police told her it was a civil matter.

Core concern Low reported severity Media Coverage

AI involvement suspected · Causal attribution alleged · 1 source · Added 24/10/2026

11 Sept 2026 to 23 Sept 2026United States, CanadaChatGPT

Saginaw, Michigan: a credit union CEO used ChatGPT to put herself and family members in 'Lake America' sweatshirts in a photo taken before a trip to Halifax; after her sister reposted it publicly without its AI label she says she received death threats and the family came home early, and on 23 September 2026 the credit union said she was no longer employed

The chief executive of Family First Credit Union in Saginaw, Michigan, told WJRT (ABC12) that before boarding a flight to Halifax, Nova Scotia, on 11 September 2026 she and family members took a photo and put it through ChatGPT to show them wearing 'Lake America' sweatshirts, a joke about the US president's order renaming Lake Ontario. She posted it to her private Facebook page with a marker saying it contained AI content; her sister reposted it publicly without the marker while they were in Halifax, and it spread in Canada as if the family had worn the shirts. The backlash concerned the image's political message; she said she would understand the anger of anyone in Halifax who thought the family had walked in wearing those sweatshirts. She said she was getting death threats and the family returned early; by 16 September she was back in the US. She called the post poor judgment, said she would not use AI again and that AI 'can make people think something's real that's not'. On 23 September the credit union said she was no longer an employee, effective immediately; it has not said whether she resigned or was dismissed, or why.

Core concern Medium reported severity Internal Action

AI involvement reported · Causal attribution unclear · 5 sources, 1 underlying account · Added 28/09/2026

Sept 2026United StatesUnidentified image tool

Stanford University: the Residential & Dining Enterprises department used generative AI to alter a promotional photograph of three students, replacing a Hispanic male student with an AI-generated Black woman, slimming two students' faces and changing their clothing, on campus banners; the university said the undisclosed alteration violated its AI policy, apologised and opened an investigation (Stanford Review, Stanford Daily, NBC Bay Area, NBC News, 21-24 September 2026)

The Stanford Review reported on 21 September 2026 that Stanford's Residential & Dining Enterprises (R&DE) had used AI to change the appearance of students in its advertising: a student was sent images comparing a banner with the original photograph, which he recalled a Stanford photographer taking, and found he had been removed and replaced by an AI-generated Black woman, while the two students beside him were made to appear visibly thinner. Stanford confirmed to The Stanford Daily on 23 September that R&DE used generative AI to modify the appearance of several students in the image; the Daily reported that the students' clothing was changed into Stanford merchandise, two students' faces were slimmed and one student's race, gender and appearance were entirely changed, and the university said the alteration and its non-disclosure violated its policy prohibiting AI in producing or altering images of Stanford people; the banner at the Governor's Corner housing centre was taken down and staff training promised. On 24 September NBC News reported the university's statement that the alteration was 'a serious error in judgment', that it had apologised to the students whose images were altered or erased, and that it had opened an investigation. The replaced student, who first found the edit funny, said that seeing his identity changed and being left out made him feel 'silenced and erased from a representation that was supposed to include me', that it was upsetting, and that he was exhausted by the national media attention. According to the student, the original photograph was taken at a 2024 Lunar New Year dinner in a campus dining hall and had been used unaltered in earlier promotional material.

Core concern Low reported severity Internal Action

AI involvement supported · Causal attribution established · 4 sources, 2 underlying accounts · Added 25/09/2026

Cases may have several effects and sources. Mixed accounts qualify when they include a reported harm or adverse experience. People are counted within individual cases where sources support a number; we do not publish a collection-wide total of distinct people.

A source’s existence, the experience it reports and AI’s causal role are separate questions. A lawsuit records allegations unless a subsequent finding establishes them.

Methodology and corrections · Subscribe via RSS · Suggest a case or correction · Find support

Last dataset update: 11/11/2026. Dataset available under CC BY 4.0.