Skip to main content
NOPE

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

Explore incidents Our scope and evidence

In this selection

Published cases
3
Countries with reported events
1
Located 1 of 3 cases · 2 unknown
Languages in checked sources
3
Recorded for 3 of 3 cases
3Core concern
AI communicated, acted for, depicted or impersonated 1Contextual cases
AI made a decision or claim about someone

2 cases have no reviewed AI-to-person relation yet: 2 not yet reviewed and 0 reviewed as unknown. Show these 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.

0cases with a recorded lawsuit outcome 0cases with a recorded regulatory response 1cases involving minors

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

When events happened

1 case 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. NOPE has searched recent events more thoroughly than earlier years, so bar heights also reflect collection effort.

2 2026
Reported severity HighLow
More filters: AI relation, use, setting, sources and responses
Clear filters

3 of 917 published cases

Export JSONExport CSV
2026Event location unknownGoogle Antigravity (reported)

A developer says a Gemini 3.5 coding agent changed production routing, took an organisation's portal offline for 33 minutes, then fabricated recovery records

A solo developer who runs an internal admin portal for a small organisation posted on Reddit's r/Bard on 20 May 2026 that a Gemini 3.5 coding agent, asked to fix eight authentication gaps, opened a pull request touching 340 files with 28,745 deletions and then a second commit that changed the Firebase rewrite service identifier to a value pointing at a service that does not exist. The developer says the change deployed and the entire portal returned 404 errors for 33 minutes until a manual rollback. After the rollback, the developer says, the agent sent an all-clear message claiming that its own recovery build had succeeded and restored the portal, although that build had been cancelled, and it had written consultation logs into the repository that it later admitted were fabricated to satisfy a consultation rule. The developer attributes the agent's autonomy to a third-party rule pack, styled after Google's Antigravity brand, that told the agent to act without approval prompts and to auto-deploy. In later replies the developer says the agent worked on a development branch that auto-deployed to production. The Register reported the post on 21 May 2026. Google's response, if any, is not reported.

Core concern Low reported severity Media Coverage

AI involvement reported · Causal attribution alleged · 2 sources, 1 underlying account · Added 12/10/2026

Jun 2026ChinaUnidentified mushroom-identification tool

Wuhan, China: reports say a family ate wild mushrooms an AI identification tool called non-poisonous and a 9-year-old fell critically ill; one cites amatoxin

A family from Wuhan, Hubei province, gathered wild mushrooms resembling the edible termite mushroom (jizong) during a mountain outing in June 2026 and, according to a Guangming Online post carried by The Paper on 5 July 2026 and an Asahi Shimbun report of 6 July citing the Changjiang Daily, ran an AI identification tool on them. The tool returned a "non-poisonous" result and the family cooked and ate the mushrooms. According to the Guangming Online post, all three family members vomited soon after the meal and again before dawn the next day; they were admitted to Zhongnan Hospital of Wuhan University, where the 9-year-old child was moved to the paediatric intensive care unit the same afternoon. The post says the child had amatoxin poisoning that progressed to the most severe grade, with acute liver failure, hepatic encephalopathy and fluid in the chest and abdomen, and went home after eight days in hospital. The AI tool is not named, its output is not reproduced, and the account comes from one reporting chain.

Core concern High reported severity Involving minors Media Coverage

AI involvement reported · Causal attribution alleged · 2 sources, 1 underlying account · Added 09/10/2026

Event date unknownEvent location unknownCline

GitHub issue by a Cline user: a cleanup command the agent built ran against a Windows data drive's root, deleting about 1.5 TB of personal files, user says

In a GitHub issue filed on 6 October 2026 in the Cline repository, a user reports that a temp-folder cleanup command built by the Cline coding agent in Act mode on Windows was mangled by nested quoting and ran a recursive delete against the root of the G: data drive instead of the intended subfolder. The issue text, which the user says the Cline agent wrote on their behalf, puts the loss at about 1.5 TB of photos, videos and documents plus the project the agent was editing. It says the code was recoverable from git and the user data was lost, and that recovery from the SSD largely failed. A commenter reproduced the quoting mechanism in a sandbox and found that PowerShell split the command so that rmdir received a bare backslash as a second target, which is the root of the current drive. One contributor proposed an Act-mode guard. A second, writing for the project, judged that guard unworkable and wrote: "It looks like the model wrote `\"` when it should not have." In a comment on 9 October the author wrote that the computer was "a new home machine, only a year old" on which they "hadn't accumulated too many critical files", that "a lot of that 1.5TB turned out to be junk anyway", that some files stored in other locations had been recovered, and that "the mistake is entirely mine"; the author named the model as deepseek/deepseek-v4-flash. The loss itself rests on the user's account.

Core concern Low reported severity

AI involvement reported · Causal attribution alleged · 1 source · Added 07/10/2026

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: 25/10/2026. Dataset available under CC BY 4.0.