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
4
Countries with reported events
2
Located 2 of 4 cases · 2 unknown
Languages in checked sources
2
Recorded for 4 of 4 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 CriticalMediumLow
More filters: AI relation, use, setting, sources and responses
Clear filters

4 of 1099 published cases

Event date unknownEvent location unknownUnidentified AI tool

Belgian Pensions Ombudsman says an AI tool told a new retiree his missed first pension month could be paid retroactively, an answer based on Dutch rules

The Belgian Pensions Ombudsman (Ombudsdienst Pensioenen) published an anonymised example from its casework. According to the Ombudsman, a future retiree with limited digital skills wanted to apply online for an early retirement pension but did not press the send button, so no application was filed and his pension was not paid in his first month of retirement. The Federal Pension Service told him that an early pension can start at the earliest in the month after the application, so that month could not be paid. He checked this using AI and received the answer that a pension can be paid retroactively for up to one year. He complained to the Federal Pension Service and then to the Ombudsman. The Ombudsman confirmed that the service's answer was correct, told him that the information he had found concerned Dutch legislation, referred him to the pension services' websites and says it tried in this way to restore his trust in the pension service. It could not recover the missed month because Belgian pension law has no right to correct good-faith errors. The lost month resulted from the unsubmitted application; the AI answer misinformed him about whether it could be recovered. The tool is not named and the dates of the exchange and complaint are not stated; European Pensions reported the case on 9 July 2026.

Core concern Low reported severity Regulatory Action

AI involvement supported · Causal attribution supported · 2 sources, 1 underlying account · Added 24/10/2026

2 Oct 2026AustraliaUnidentified image tool

Perth woman tells PerthNow men at a Scarborough pub covertly photographed her and a friend and used an AI program to make sexualised images shown to the pair

A Perth woman told PerthNow (report carried by The West Australian and The Nightly, 7 October 2026) that on a Friday night at a Scarborough venue a group of eight to ten men sitting nearby began bantering with her and a friend, and that one of them photographed her without her knowledge, put the photo into an AI program and altered it into sexualised content showing her kissing several of the men. According to her account the men passed the image around and showed it to the two women while laughing, and had also made sexual content from a photo of her friend. The women reported the men to the venue, which banned them, and to Western Australia Police; in messages seen by PerthNow a detective wrote that there was at that point no law covering AI-created photos or media, while a WA Police spokesperson said state legislation criminalises non-consensual distribution of intimate images including AI-altered ones and that a statutory review is considering possession. The man who allegedly made the image later messaged her that he had made it as a joke and apologised. The images are not reported to have been distributed online; the tool is not identified; the account is the woman's own, with the man's private messages and the police correspondence as described by the newspaper.

Core concern Low reported severity Media Coverage

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

2 Jan 2026Event location unknownGrok

UK: Grok made sexualised images of a Welsh presenter and a broadcaster at users' requests; police closed both cases, then reopened the presenter's, TBIJ reports

The Bureau of Investigative Journalism (TBIJ) and The Observer reported on 29 September 2026 that police investigations into sexualised images generated by X's chatbot Grok had failed to identify anyone. A Welsh presenter and campaigner against deepfake abuse, who had criticised Grok publicly on New Year's Eve 2025, saw an anonymous X user ask '@grok' to put her in a bikini made of cling film; Grok generated the image from her profile photo and posted it. She reported it to South Wales Police on 2 January 2026, was not asked for a statement until March, and was told officers had not heard back from X; the case was closed in May with the force saying no suspect could be identified. The same account also targeted a commentator and broadcaster, who estimates about 300 Grok images and videos of her were posted during the wave, including one alongside Jeffrey Epstein reported to the Metropolitan Police, which likewise said no suspect could be identified. The presenter entered pre-action legal correspondence with xAI (part of SpaceXAI) alleging misuse of private information and breaches of data-protection law and the Equality Act. On 22 October 2026 TBIJ reported that South Wales Police had reopened her case after she filed a formal complaint in September and TBIJ gave officers new information about the requesting user, including a crypto wallet and dozens of deleted posts; the force said it was now investigating the offence under the sexual-offences legislation aimed at deepfakes, rather than malicious-communications law, including enquiries with X. TBIJ added that other users had edited images of her with the standalone Grok app and that she is starting civil legal action against the company. BBC Wales had reported in January 2026 that explicit images of the presenter were created with the chatbot and shared without her consent.

Core concern Medium reported severity Investigation Opened

AI involvement supported · Causal attribution supported · 4 sources, 2 underlying accounts · Added 30/09/2026

1 Aug 2024 to 26 Sept 2024South KoreaUnidentified image tool

South Korea Telegram AI Deepfake Sexual Abuse Crisis

In late August 2024, journalist Ko Narin of The Hankyoreh exposed networks of Telegram rooms in South Korea where AI tools were used to turn ordinary photos of women and girls — middle and high school pupils, university students, teachers and servicewomen — into sexual deepfakes, shared with their identities in school- and university-specific 'humiliation rooms'. Police figures showed 297 deepfake cases in January-July 2024 (vs 180 in all of 2023); the education ministry counted more than 900 victimized students, teachers and staff; President Yoon ordered a crackdown; and on 26 September 2024 the National Assembly criminalized possessing or viewing sexually explicit deepfakes. Victims were often minors and perpetrators mostly teenagers.

Core concern Critical reported severity Involving minors Criminal Charges

AI involvement supported · Causal attribution supported · 7 sources, 6 underlying accounts · Added 29/01/2026

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.