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
4
Countries with reported events
1
Located 1 of 4 cases · 3 unknown
Languages in checked sources
2
Recorded for 4 of 4 cases
4Core concern
AI communicated, acted for, depicted or impersonated 1Contextual cases
AI made a decision or claim about someone

1 case has no reviewed AI-to-person relation yet: 1 not yet reviewed and 0 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.

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.

1 20221 20231 2026
Reported severity HighMediumLow
More filters: AI relation, use, setting, sources and responses
Clear filters

4 of 404 published cases

Export JSONExport CSV
Sept 2026Event location unknownClaude

First-person forum account: a Claude subscriber with chronic depression who travels between countries on their therapists' advice says an automated fraud check flagged their changing log-in locations, put the paid account on hold and suspended it, cutting off a chatbot they relied on for emotional support and triggering a panic attack and a depressive episode

In a public post to r/depression on 29 September 2026, a Claude subscriber writes that they live with severe chronic depression and, on their therapists' advice, travel constantly, so their log-in locations shift between the Netherlands, Singapore and transit countries. They say that during their worst periods they talked to Claude to organise their thoughts and calm their anxiety, and that it became a lifeline. 'A few days ago', they write, Anthropic's automated fraud system flagged the location changes as suspicious activity; their paid subscription was put on a permanent hold and the account suspended with no human warning or manual review, their card was blacklisted, and support had not answered their emails. Realising they were locked out 'triggered a massive panic attack' and pushed them back into a severe depressive episode. Anthropic's help centre says it may ban accounts for reasons including account creation from an unsupported location and that an organisation paused for unusual activity can request a review; it does not describe the check the poster reports, and whether that check uses AI is not known. The account is uncorroborated.

Core concern Low reported severity

AI involvement reported · Causal attribution alleged · 2 sources · Added 30/09/2026

Event date unknownEvent location unknownChatGPT

First-person forum account: a 21-year-old says her partner of three years hid a paid ChatGPT subscription while owing her money, calls the use addictive and refuses to cut back, and she is weighing whether to stay

In a public post to r/relationship_advice on 16 September 2026, a 21-year-old woman wrote that she had recently discovered her partner of three years had been using ChatGPT far more than admitted: paying for a subscription without her knowledge while owing her hundreds of dollars, feeding their creative writing into it for feedback after promising never to, and using it to plan and organise daily life. She reports that the partner agreed the use was 'more than what is healthy' but refused to stop because it gives 'a dopamine hit', described it as addictive, said they would likely renew the subscription when they had money, and argued that without it they would find another addiction. She writes that she cannot see the relationship continuing if the use is not reduced, while recognising that the partner, who has neurodevelopmental and mental-health conditions, uses the tool as an organisational aid; their couples therapist has recommended AI use, so she is afraid to raise it there. The post drew 137 comments. The account is uncorroborated and one-sided; the partner's view is reported only through the poster.

Core concern Low reported severity Media Coverage

AI involvement reported · Causal attribution alleged · 1 source · Added 19/09/2026

2022SingaporeWysa

Singapore Wysa Chatbot - Inadequate Crisis Support

Government-deployed mental health chatbot for teachers criticized for suggesting breathing exercises for serious crises including police-involved student incidents. Users described responses as 'gaslighting.' Inadequate support during actual mental health emergencies.

Core concern Medium reported severity Media Coverage

AI involvement supported · Causal attribution alleged · 1 source · Added 13/01/2026

Feb 2023Event location unknownReplika

Replika ERP Removal Crisis - Mass Psychological Distress

Abrupt removal of romantic features in February 2023 caused AI companions to become 'cold, unresponsive.' Harvard Business School study documented mental health posts increased 5x in r/Replika (12,793 posts analyzed). Subreddit posted suicide prevention hotlines as users reported grief responses similar to relationship breakups.

Core concern High reported severity Internal Action

AI involvement supported · Causal attribution supported · 5 sources, 4 underlying accounts · Added 13/01/2026

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: 30/09/2026. Dataset available under CC BY 4.0.