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 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

In this selection

Published cases
2
Countries with reported events
2
Located 2 of 2 cases · 0 unknown
Languages in checked sources
2
Recorded for 2 of 2 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.

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

2 of 174 published cases

2 Sept 2026United StatesMeta AI (suggested-question prompts under Instagram and Facebook posts, drawing on the user's and related accounts' content)

Utah: Meta AI's suggested prompts under a mother's Instagram video compiled her young daughters' names, birth details and old photos and her likely home location; Meta said the prompts 'missed the mark' and changed the feature

On 1 September 2026 Kalie Robins, a Utah travel creator, posted a short Instagram video of herself singing in the car with one of her daughters; it was also shown on Facebook. The next day she noticed Meta AI had placed suggested questions under the post, starting with 'Who's the child passenger?'. Clicking the prompts, she said, produced her two daughters' names, birth information, photos and videos drawn from her own and relatives' past posts, including a newborn photo from her mother's account and a picture she believed she had deleted years earlier, and a further prompt, 'Where does Kalie Robins live?', assembled older and newer posts into her likely location. Her 2 September reaction video drew more than 310,000 likes. Meta told reporters the prompts 'missed the mark', 'should never have been generated' and had been fixed, while saying the feature only surfaces information the user can already access; it disputed that a long-deleted photo was used, saying the photo had been deleted shortly before the video and remained briefly visible through a bug. Robins said Meta never contacted her and that the episode left her feeling she had 'failed' her children.

Contextual tracker case News report AI involvement: supported Causal attribution: supported Low reported severity Internal Action Involving minors

Added 18/09/2026

Feb 2026 to Apr 2026BrazilAI image-animation and face-insertion ('deepfake') tools; the influencer told police he used TikTok tools to animate and manipulate the images, and said in a recording that he 'throws' the photographs into an AI that makes them dance

São Paulo: a 37-year-old influencer used AI 'deepfake' tools to insert photographs of young women and adolescent girls of the Congregação Cristã do Brasil, taken from their social-media profiles without consent, into sexualised videos set inside churches; a 16-year-old and a 17-year-old filed police reports and the Civil Police investigate under the child-protection statute

A humorist and tyre repairer from Lençóis Paulista, São Paulo state, who posts on YouTube, Instagram, Facebook and TikTok as an impersonator of a television presenter, used AI tools to turn photographs that young women and adolescent girls of the Congregação Cristã do Brasil (CCB) had posted from inside churches into videos in which they appear dancing sensually beside women in short skirts, with the presenter inserted and the influencer commenting on their clothes. A 16-year-old congregant and her parents went to the 8ª Delegacia de Defesa da Mulher in São Paulo in February 2026; g1 made the case public on 22 April 2026 and Folha de S.Paulo confirmed the investigation. The girl told g1 the photograph had been taken in 2025 in front of the altar of a CCB church, that she was very shy, had not wanted to be exposed and was afraid the exposure would affect her social life, and that she had stopped taking photographs of herself; her family sued for moral damages. On 30 April 2026 the mother of a second girl, aged 17, registered a police report at the 4ª DDM Norte; g1 reported that the exposure had affected the girl psychologically. The São Paulo Civil Police investigate under article 241-C of the Estatuto da Criança e do Adolescente (simulating a sex or pornography scene with a minor by digital means) and for defamation of adult women in the videos; the inquiry was sent at the prosecutor's request to Lençóis Paulista, where the suspect lives, and the total number of people depicted was still being established. The influencer admitted making the videos with AI, said through his lawyer that they were satire and criticism of customs in a context of humour, said he did not know some of those depicted were minors, denied in his police statement linking the adolescent's image to sexualised content and said he had taken her for an adult, and posted an apology video (dated 5 April by g1's first report, which says it does not mention the deepfakes; described as posted after his police statement in g1's second report). The CCB said it had identified him, was taking internal measures and supports legal measures by the authorities. No later development was found on 2026-09-22.

Core concern News report AI involvement: supported Causal attribution: supported High reported severity Investigation Opened Involving minors

Added 14/06/2026

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: 22/09/2026. Dataset available under CC BY 4.0.