NOPE · AI and people

AI incidents

Name: NOPE: AI incidents
Creator: NOPE

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 is wider: it also records consequential decisions and claims about people. Each account is reviewed for publication; claims may remain uncorroborated or disputed. How we review and count cases

Explore incidents Our scope and evidence

In this selection

Published cases: 0
Countries with reported events: —; Located 0 of 0 cases · 0 unknown
Languages in checked sources: —; Recorded for 0 of 0 cases

0Core concern
AI communicated, acted for, depicted or impersonated 0Contextual cases
AI made a decision or claim about someone 0Unknown or pending relation
0 legacy rows pending · 0 explicitly unknown

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.

0cases with a recorded lawsuit outcome 0cases with a recorded regulatory response 0cases involving minors

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

When events happened

0 cases without a known event year

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.

No known event years in this selection.

Search cases Consequence Event country

More filters: AI relation, use, setting, sources and responses

AI-to-person relation Setting Whose AI use Source type inspected AI system Reported severity Response / population Legacy evidence assessment

Event year Sort by Clear filters

0 of 166 published cases

Export JSON Export CSV

No published cases in this selection.

Private research accounts appear here only after publication review. An empty view does not establish that these experiences do not occur.

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 People are counted within individual cases where sources support a number; we do not publish a collection-wide total of distinct people.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: 21/09/2026. Dataset available under CC BY 4.0.