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

3 cases have no reviewed AI-to-person relation yet: 0 not yet reviewed and 3 reviewed as unknown. Show all 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.

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

3 2026
Reported severity Medium
More filters: AI relation, use, setting, sources and responses
Clear filters

3 of 521 published cases

Export JSONExport CSV
2 Oct 2026 to 3 Oct 2026Event location unknownUnidentified AI database tool

Family member's forum account: a worker whose job had been to find the errors of an AI tool their employer added to its database was told in early October 2026 that she was being laid off, with the company citing its decision to introduce AI coding and, according to their child, moving the budget to fixing the AI

In a public post to r/antiai at 21:43 UTC on 3 October 2026, a person writes that their mother was told the previous day that she was being laid off because her company was "Deciding to introduce Artificial Intelligence coding". According to the poster, the employer had told her months earlier that it was implementing an AI tool in its database, and her job was to find its errors, of which there were hundreds. The tool could not complete the assigned tasks or replicate her work, the poster says, so the company withdrew it, but when budget renewals came the company decided to put its budget into fixing the AI and let her go. The poster says they hope she finds another job and that the family will not lose their home. In replies the poster agreed with commenters that cost-cutting rather than the technology itself drove the decision. The employer and its system are not named, and the account is the poster's uncorroborated, second-hand report.

AI relation unknown Medium reported severity

AI involvement reported · Causal attribution alleged · 1 source · Added 04/10/2026

4 May 2026FranceDIGI editorial tool

Créteil, France: a court suspended Gisi's (Infopro Digital) plan to cut eight sub-editor posts in favour of a generative-AI tool, finding a serious and characterised risk to the physical and mental health of several categories of staff

Gisi, the Infopro Digital subsidiary publishing L'Usine nouvelle, LSA and L'Argus de l'assurance (127 staff, 92 journalists), presented to its works council (CSE) on 4 May 2026 a reorganisation built around 'DIGI', an in-house generative-AI editorial tool, and on 12 May 2026 opened consultation on the reorganisation and on the resulting collective dismissal of its eight secrétaires de rédaction (sub-editors), to be replaced by two chefs d'édition, on the company's estimate that the tool would take over about 70% of sub-editor tasks. Some 250 journalists across Infopro Digital's 26 titles had struck in spring 2026 against a group-wide plan to cut 19 sub-editor posts, and according to Digital Watch (citing Stratégies) five of the eight Gisi sub-editors had received pre-dismissal interview letters. The CSE, relying on an expert report, went to the Créteil judicial court in July. On 15 September 2026 the référé judge found that deploying the plan without real-situation testing presented 'un risque grave et caractérisé sur la santé physique et mentale de plusieurs catégories de salariés', ordered the suspension of the reorganisation and the collective dismissal (including the redeployment processes) until real-situation tests and full pilot issues are produced, with a provisional penalty of 8,000 euros per day for three months, and refused the damages provision. Gisi said it would continue the tests and reserved the right to appeal.

AI relation unknown Medium reported severity Lawsuit Ongoing

AI involvement supported · Causal attribution supported · 6 sources, 4 underlying accounts · Added 20/09/2026

28 May 2026 to 12 Jul 2026United StatesDatavant utilization-review software (reported)

Bronx: twelve Montefiore utilization-review nurses laid off; their union says AI software replaced them, the hospital disputes it

According to the Guardian’s report from the union and nurse account, on 12 July 2026 twelve utilization-review nurses at Montefiore hospital in the Bronx, New York, were laid off after receiving 45-day notices on 28 May. The New York State Nurses Association says they were replaced by AI-powered software that reviews patient records to justify care to insurers, and that the layoffs breach the contract with AI safeguards won after the January 2026 strike. Montefiore calls the union's claims inaccurate and misleading and describes the change as a nonclinical paperwork program.

AI relation unknown Medium reported severity Media Coverage

AI involvement disputed · Causal attribution disputed · 4 sources, 2 underlying accounts · Added 15/09/2026

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: 04/10/2026. Dataset available under CC BY 4.0.