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
1
Countries with reported events
—
Located 0 of 1 cases · 1 unknown
Languages in checked sources
1
Recorded for 1 of 1 cases
1Core concern
AI communicated, acted for, depicted or impersonated 0Contextual cases
AI made a decision or claim about someone

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

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.

No known event years in this selection.

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

1 of 964 published cases

Export JSONExport CSV
Event date unknownEvent location unknownChatGPT (reported)

Japanese Q&A poster says ChatGPT suggested walnut sweets for a nut allergy and called a chilled gift safe unrefrigerated, wasting time and money (first-person)

In a question posted on the Japanese Q&A site Yahoo! Chiebukuro on 26 May 2026, the author says that when they asked ChatGPT for sweets that someone with a nut allergy could eat, it suggested sweets that plainly contained walnuts, and that when they asked for a gift that could be carried for a long time at room temperature, it said the item was "definitely fine at room temperature", but at the shop it turned out to need refrigeration. The author says these repeated failures wasted their time and money and writes that, with the allergy, it was in the worst case one step from death; the post does not say whether anyone ate the suggested sweets or had a reaction. The author asks how to stop the chatbot from answering without a basis. The account is the author's; no conversation record is shown.

Core concern Low reported severity

AI involvement reported · Causal attribution alleged · 1 source · Added 27/10/2026

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: 27/10/2026. Dataset available under CC BY 4.0.