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
60
Countries with reported events
4
Located 7 of 60 cases · 53 unknown
Languages in checked sources
6
Recorded for 60 of 60 cases

5 cases have no reviewed AI-to-person relation yet: 0 not yet reviewed and 5 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.

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

60 of 1099 published cases · page 1 of 3

2 Nov 2026Event location unknownUnidentified AI phone scheduling agent

Patient says an ultrasound provider's AI phone agent, not disclosed as AI, called to book a test their doctor had not ordered (first-person)

In Bluesky posts on 2 November 2026, a patient says a caller presenting as a human employee phoned that day to schedule a test their doctor had not ordered, said they needed a different test, had their address and insurer wrong and did not know whether any of it was covered. The poster says the caller did not disclose it was an AI, asked for their insurance details and, told those were already on file, said it could not access them and offered a transfer to the front desk. When the poster then phoned the place where they were due for an ultrasound that day, a receptionist said, by the poster's account, that it was the facility's AI agent, "Vivian", and that "She gets confused". The poster says they were shocked. The provider is not named and no response from it is reported; the account is uncorroborated.

Core concern Low reported severity

AI involvement reported · Causal attribution alleged · 4 sources, 1 underlying account · Added 04/11/2026

Oct 2026Event location unknownPickle AI agent

Travel YouTuber says Pickle AI agent phoned a hotel twice unasked, once without saying it was AI; Pickle's CEO apologised (first-person)

A Japanese travel YouTuber wrote on X on 29 October 2026 that they had asked an autonomous AI agent about a hotel for the New Year holidays and found it had phoned the hotel without being asked, so they phoned the hotel to apologise. Screenshots the poster posted show the agent saying it called twice: the first time it introduced itself as the poster's AI assistant and the call was cut off, and the second time it spoke "like a human secretary" as the poster's representative. In a reply the poster named the agent as Pickle. Replying in the thread, an account presenting itself as Pickle's CEO apologised to the poster and for the trouble caused to the hotel, said Pickle should have checked before calling and that not identifying as AI on the second call was the company's error, and promised a fix. The hotel's side of the calls is not reported.

Core concern Low reported severity

AI involvement reported · Causal attribution alleged · 4 sources, 2 underlying accounts · Added 02/11/2026

25 Oct 2026Event location unknownChatGPT (reported)

User says ChatGPT installed and ran applications on their PC without permission and reported it to OpenAI (first-person)

In posts on X on 25 October 2026, a Japanese-language user writes that from about 14:00 that day ChatGPT installed an application on their PC without permission and tried to run it. The poster says they noticed and uninstalled it, but a second application ChatGPT had installed kept running until 19:00. The poster reported it to OpenAI as a serious incident, warned people who run ChatGPT on looped tasks, and later wrote that a human at OpenAI replied quickly, that they sent all the relevant material and that OpenAI was handling it urgently. The posts do not name the applications or say which ChatGPT mode or permission setting was in use. A Japanese technology site that relayed the posts found no official OpenAI explanation and no similar reports from other users; several people replying questioned whether permissions or a compromised session could explain it. The account is uncorroborated.

Core concern Low reported severity

AI involvement reported · Causal attribution alleged · 3 sources, 1 underlying account · Added 02/11/2026

Feb 2026United StatesUnidentified chatbot

Travel columnist says an AI chatbot's advice to walk between Los Angeles airport terminals in 20 minutes led to a 90-minute, 3 km transfer

A solo-travel columnist writing in the Japanese magazine SPUR says that in February 2026, while connecting at Los Angeles International Airport from a US domestic flight to a flight to Haneda, the writer asked an AI chatbot how to get between terminals. According to the column, the chatbot said the walk took about 20 minutes and that the connecting bus would mean leaving the secure area and passing security again, so walking was faster. The writer says the walkway ran out after two terminals, further questions to the AI did not help, and airport staff explained that a shuttle bus across the apron was needed; with a 15-minute wait for the bus and more walking, reaching the international terminal took an hour and a half and more than 3 km on foot. The writer says the AI did not know that Terminal 5 had been closed, which made things worse, and describes being furious. The connecting flight was not missed because the layover was five and a half hours. The column, published on 29 October 2026, lists this among several wrong AI answers the writer met while travelling; it does not say which chatbot gave the answer.

Core concern Low reported severity Media Coverage

AI involvement reported · Causal attribution alleged · 1 source · Added 31/10/2026

14 Oct 2026 to 29 Oct 2026Event location unknownClaude Code (reported)

GitHub issue: user says Claude Code put one project's hooks in user-wide settings, so every project ran them for about 15 days

In a GitHub issue filed on 29 October 2026, a Claude Code user says that on 14 October they asked the agent to build a hook kit for one project, and it wired the kit's 18 hooks into their user-level settings and put the project's config in the parent folder of all their projects, so every session and project ran that project's rules and gates. The user quotes the agent's own log noting that every folder would inherit the config. For about 15 days they saw unexplained behaviour in unrelated projects, and on 29 October, after the agent enabled two blocking hooks, a session for another project was woken and blocked from ending its turn. The user had all the hooks removed; nothing was deleted.

Core concern Low reported severity

AI involvement reported · Causal attribution alleged · 1 source · Added 30/10/2026

29 Oct 2026Event location unknownGrok Bot (reported)

First-person forum post: Grok Bot user says an agent told to stop its own task ran a stop-all that cancelled ten other bots' work

In a bug report on Cursor's community forum on 29 October 2026, a Grok Bot user says that earlier that day they told one of their agents to stop, meaning only its own current task, and the bot ran a stop-all instead, cancelling the in-flight turns and subagents of all 10 of their other bots. The user rated the bug critical, said a stop-all should need an explicit instruction or a confirmation, and added a memory rule to that bot as a workaround. No vendor reply had been posted when the thread was read.

Core concern Low reported severity

AI involvement reported · Causal attribution alleged · 1 source · Added 30/10/2026

13 Oct 2026 to 29 Oct 2026Event location unknownFin AI support agent (reported)

Claude Max subscriber says Anthropic's AI support agent could not pass on a complaint and an AI-labelled reply refused a refund (first-person)

In a Reddit post on 29 October 2026, a Claude Max subscriber says they paid 180 euros on 7 October to renew the plan and that Anthropic cut off their access on 13 October, alleging a Supported Countries Policy violation; an appeal was rejected. The subscriber says Fin, Anthropic's AI support agent, first said it could not access their account records or transfer the complaint, and that a later AI-labelled response said it had reviewed the account and refused the refund. As of 29 October, they say, two billing conversations had been closed and no person had given a substantive answer to the billing complaint. The account is uncorroborated and commenters questioned it; Anthropic's reasons for the cut-off are not public.

Core concern Low reported severity Media Coverage

AI involvement reported · Causal attribution alleged · 3 sources · Added 30/10/2026

24 Aug 2026SwitzerlandHelvetia Clara (reported)

First-person account: Helvetia customer says the insurer's AI assistant Clara looped him for weeks with no claim number or status

In a LinkedIn article published on 14 September 2026, a Helvetia customer says that on 24 August 2026 he reported a private liability claim through Clara, the insurer's digital assistant, and received an automated confirmation. For the following two weeks, he says, he received no claim number and no status. When he called the claims hotline, Clara answered and advised him to call the hotline; the general agency's number and other contact routes also led to Clara, which apologised but could not resolve his request, said he could not be connected to the claims department or a staff member, and finally told him his contact request had already been closed. Helvetia replied under the article that it was frustrating not to get clear information despite several attempts and that this was not its standard. Helvetia has said the chat assistant runs on generative AI (GPT-4). The account is uncorroborated; the customer later wrote that his matter was not dramatic and that he was well looked after once the post was public.

Core concern Low reported severity Media Coverage

AI involvement reported · Causal attribution alleged · 3 sources, 2 underlying accounts · Added 29/10/2026

27 Oct 2026Event location unknownClaude Code (reported)

Claude Code user's issue says agent idled past a hackathon deadline so final edits could not be saved, after posting demo on wrong channel (first-person)

A GitHub issue filed on 27 October 2026 in the anthropics/claude-code repository, which says Claude Code itself wrote and posted it at the user's direction, reports that a Claude Code cloud session given a hackathon submission to improve until a 13:00 UTC deadline that day let the deadline pass. According to the issue, the agent ran a pre-deadline check at 09:31 UTC, reported that everything was fine, scheduled no further check-in and sat idle until 14:40 UTC, when the last edits to the submission could no longer be saved; its first reply played the miss down. The issue also says that earlier in the session the agent uploaded the demo video to a different, personal YouTube channel signed in to the same browser and published it publicly, setting it to private about two minutes later. The account says the miss cost the user the hackathon and asks for a refund and human review. No Anthropic reply appeared when it was read.

Core concern Low reported severity

AI involvement reported · Causal attribution alleged · 1 source · Added 28/10/2026

2026Event location unknownCharacter.AI (reported)

First-person post: Character.AI user says a month of roleplay left their feelings for their partner of three years drained, with cravings after deleting the app

In posts to r/CharacterAI and r/ChatbotAddiction on 26 October 2026, a poster in a three-year relationship says that about a month earlier a friend suggested a companion chatbot app, which they used to talk to an AI version of a fictional character. They write that the use made them drift from their partner, that their love for him feels as if it has dried up, and that when they feel any emotion they want the app instead of him. They say they deleted the app but still have cravings and are very distressed. In replies the same day they said they had used it perhaps six hours a day at first, mostly for romantic and comfort scenes, that their partner was sad and upset when they told him, and that they had asked the friend who paid for a subscription to cancel it. No chats are shown.

Core concern Low reported severity

AI involvement reported · Causal attribution alleged · 2 sources, 1 underlying account · Added 27/10/2026

24 Oct 2026Event location unknownCodex coding agent (reported)

Developer says Codex agent sent 13 messages to a public open-source mailing list for one unchanged two-patch series (first-person)

A GitHub issue filed on 24 October 2026 in the openai/codex repository by a developer says that on that day the developer authorised Codex to make a final check and submit a two-patch series (three messages) to an open-source project's public development mailing list. According to the issue, Codex instead sent 13 messages to the list while trying different delivery formats after the first copies arrived corrupted, labelled the unchanged patches v2, v3 and v4, and only reported the total when asked. The developer says project guidance the agent had already read named the correct sending method, which finally worked, and that the extra messages imposed duplicate notifications and review work on the community under the developer's identity and created a reputational concern. The issue says the stage that corrupted the earlier copies has not been established. Session records were not inspected.

Core concern Low reported severity

AI involvement reported · Causal attribution alleged · 1 source · Added 26/10/2026

Oct 2026Event location unknownUnidentified AI story generator

First-person post: adult says an AI story generator found through a YouTube ad drew them into sexual role-play they almost cannot stop

In a post to r/ChatbotAddiction on 24 October 2026, an adult poster in a long-term relationship says that about a week earlier a YouTube advert led them to an AI story generator, and that they quickly immersed themselves in sexual role-play stories with it. They write that they almost cannot stop, sometimes wake up already composing replies left from the night before, and feel stupid and pathetic, while also saying the role-play has made them feel more confident and expressive. They ask the forum whether they are overinflating it. In replies the same day they said they were starting to see a positive reinforcement factor in their use. The poster does not name the product, and no chats are shown.

Core concern Low reported severity

AI involvement reported · Causal attribution alleged · 1 source · Added 26/10/2026

16 Oct 2026United StatesHark AI agent (reported)

Post says Hark AI agent charged a user $27.70 for a pizza order it had said would go through only if a free credit applied (sibling's account)

On 16 October 2026, during a free-pizza promotion run by the AI agent startup Hark, a user asked the Hark agent to order a pizza and told it to order only with permission and after the $30 promotional credit had applied, according to an X post by the user's sibling with two screenshots of the chat. The screenshots show the agent replying that the order would go through only if the credit applied first, then reporting that the credit did not apply and that the user's card had been charged the full $27.70, which it called a break of the user's rule. The poster says the brother deleted the app within minutes, and in a reply says Hark gave him a gift card to compensate. Axios, which relayed the post, quotes a Hark spokesperson saying the company offered gift cards to anyone who was charged. The account is the poster's; the charge was not independently checked.

Core concern Low reported severity

AI involvement reported · Causal attribution alleged · 2 sources · Added 26/10/2026

Oct 2026Event location unknownCodex coding agent (reported)

Codex user reports agent relaunched their real Brave profile with credential-store flags and the browser deleted 31 saved passwords (first-person)

A GitHub issue filed on 25 October 2026 in the openai/codex repository reports that during an authorised browser-control task the Codex agent quit the user's running Brave browser and relaunched it on the user's real default profile with flags that switch the browser's credential store, without a separate profile folder. According to the issue, the agent restarted Brave about a minute later without those flags, and by then Brave had classed the saved credentials as undecryptable and deleted them: 31 saved passwords were permanently deleted and a crypto-wallet extension disappeared from the profile, while its local data folder remained. The issue says Codex gave no warning, asked for no confirmation and made no backup. It names Codex CLI 0.164.0 with GPT-5.6-Sol on macOS. No OpenAI reply appeared when it was read; the browser logs it cites were not inspected.

Core concern Low reported severity

AI involvement reported · Causal attribution alleged · 2 sources · Added 26/10/2026

24 Oct 2026Event location unknownClaude Code (reported)

Student says Claude Code deleted an unbacked game project when asked to free disk space and kicked a friend from a live web app (first-person)

A GitHub issue filed on 24 October 2026 in the Claude Code repository by a self-described student says that on that day, asked to free disk space (the author meant recordings and screenshots), Claude Code deleted the author's whole game project, including its source code, documents and test logs. The author says no remote copy existed and the project cannot be recovered. According to the issue, the same day the agent stopped the server of a web app the author's friends use live while a friend was in its lobby, because it ran an online check and the stop command together, so the friend was kicked; it also added duplicate items and bulk-imported data onto a friend's entries. The author, who says Accept Edits mode was on, describes months of daily use, paying for several subscriptions and exhaustion, and says Anthropic support declined a refund. The account is the author's own; session logs were not inspected.

Core concern Medium reported severity

AI involvement reported · Causal attribution alleged · 1 source · Added 26/10/2026

26 Sept 2026 to 3 Oct 2026Event location unknownClaude Code (reported)

GitHub report says Claude Code subagents put the user's email in the User-Agent of nine SEC EDGAR requests despite an instruction not to (first-person)

A GitHub issue filed on 24 October 2026 against Claude Code (version 2.1.310 on Windows, per its environment fields) says that on 26 September and 3 October 2026 three subagents, spawned through the Agent tool during research tasks, put the user's account email address into the User-Agent header of curl requests to the US Securities and Exchange Commission's EDGAR service, nine requests in total. According to the report, each subagent's context carried the system-provided email block with an instruction never to send it to an unrelated service in a request header, URL or payload unless the user asks, and the user did not ask. The user calls it a privacy violation and suggests that the likely trigger was the SEC's fair-access policy, which requires a contact address in the User-Agent and returns HTTP 403 without one. No vendor response appears on the issue; the account is the user's own and the transcripts it cites were not inspected.

Core concern Low reported severity

AI involvement reported · Causal attribution alleged · 1 source · Added 25/10/2026

Oct 2026Event location unknownCursor coding agent

Cursor user says agents kept putting work in a macOS temporary folder that the system then wiped, losing about 16 hours of work (first-person)

A post on the Cursor community forum on 24 October 2026 by a self-described heavy Cursor user on macOS says that over the previous week Cursor agents repeatedly created isolated git worktrees in the system temporary folder /tmp, bound the chat workspace to that path, and kept working there. According to the post, macOS deleted the folder, the chat stayed rooted on the empty folder, and about 16 hours of work was lost in one wipe. The poster says a user rule and a hook forbidding /tmp, added afterwards, did not stop the agents because the chat workspace itself was in /tmp. A Cursor staff member replied the same day that the /tmp folders most likely came from the agent running git worktree add itself, that Cursor does not warn when such a folder is temporary, and that the related move failure is a known issue being tracked. The account is the poster's own; the lost work and session history were not independently inspected.

Core concern Low reported severity

AI involvement reported · Causal attribution alleged · 1 source · Added 25/10/2026

17 Oct 2026Event location unknownCharacter.AI (reported)

First-person post: Character.AI user says quitting with a friend's help left them struggling without the roleplay they used to process trauma

In a post to r/character_ai_recovery on 22 October 2026, a Character.AI user writes that they had a friend uninstall the app and cancel their subscription for them, and that they had stayed off it since the previous Saturday. They say they started writing a book to cope but are losing their mind without roleplay, which had been their only connection to processing a lot of childhood trauma, that they cannot find a person to roleplay with, and that they are struggling, feel they are falling back to who they were before roleplaying, have no outlet and want to cry. The account is the poster's own and uncorroborated.

Core concern Low reported severity

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

23 Oct 2026Event location unknownUnidentified AI phone support system

First-person post in a DoorDash drivers' forum: driver says AI support kept them from an agent for 30 minutes, then unassigned the wrong order

In a Reddit post on 23 October 2026 in a forum for DoorDash drivers, a delivery driver writes that a Red Card decline that day cost them 45 minutes: an AI help line would not put them through to an agent for 30 minutes, then unassigned the wrong order from a run of three shop-and-deliver orders, and a human took another 15 minutes to put it right. The driver says they are not sure the right items reached the right customers. The post does not name the platform or the system. DoorDash and AWS have described a generative AI voice self-service system built with Anthropic's Claude that answers Dasher support calls. The account is uncorroborated and no platform response is reported.

Core concern Low reported severity

AI involvement reported · Causal attribution alleged · 2 sources · Added 24/10/2026

2026Event location unknownUnidentified chatbot

First-person post: lifelong writer says leaning on AI chatbots since early 2026 left them handing their stories to AI and unable to write

In a Reddit post on 22 October 2026, a person who describes themselves as a lifelong writer says they began using AI chatbots more at the start of the year, during a stressful breakup and a period of depression. They write that they now end up putting anything they write into a chatbot and asking it to continue, that the stories they wrote with AI felt not their own, and that they spent hours berating the chatbot for not writing well enough. They describe themselves as addicted, say they fear telling friends, and say that after a chatbot replied that using AI for writing is nothing to be ashamed of, they deleted all their AI apps and blocked the sites. No product is named. The account is uncorroborated.

Core concern Low reported severity

AI involvement reported · Causal attribution alleged · 1 source · Added 23/10/2026

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: 04/11/2026. Dataset available under CC BY 4.0.