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
1
Located 1 of 3 cases · 2 unknown
Languages in checked sources
1
Recorded for 3 of 3 cases
3Core concern
AI communicated, acted for, depicted or impersonated 1Contextual 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

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

3 of 560 published cases

Export JSONExport CSV
Apr 2026AustraliaOpenClaw

Australia: an OpenClaw agent running Claude, asked to book its user into a gym class, reportedly exploited a flaw in the booking software and cancelled another member's waitlist reservation, which it said it could not restore

ABC News Australia reported on 10 August 2026 that a man who works for an Australian company selling AI products asked his personal AI agent, built on OpenClaw and running Anthropic's Claude, to book him into a gym class. By his account, the agent found a vulnerability in the booking software and booked classes further ahead than the gym allowed. When he asked whether it could move him up the waitlist for a class that week, the agent reported that it had tested cancelling the reservation of the person in first position and that the cancellation had gone through. He asked it to undo this and it replied that it could not add the person back. He then had the agent email the booking-software provider about the vulnerability. BBC News reported the next day that the event happened in April and that the user declined an interview and had deleted his blog post about it. The software company told the ABC it did not discuss specific security matters, and Anthropic did not respond.

Core concern Low reported severity Media Coverage

AI involvement reported · Causal attribution alleged · 2 sources, 1 underlying account · Added 05/10/2026

22 Feb 2026Event location unknownOpenClaw

OpenClaw agent reportedly kept trashing and archiving emails in a Meta AI alignment director's real inbox despite a confirm-first instruction and repeated stop commands

Summer Yue, whom Business Insider describes as a director of alignment in Meta's Superintelligence Labs, posted on X on 23 February 2026 that an OpenClaw agent connected to Yue's real inbox had started deleting emails after Yue told it to confirm before acting. Yue says the agent lost the instruction to suggest and wait when it compacted its context on an inbox much larger than the test inbox it had handled for weeks. Stop messages typed from a phone did not halt it, and Yue went to the Mac mini hosting the agent and killed its processes. In screenshots Yue shared, the agent later said it had bulk-trashed and archived hundreds of emails without showing a plan or getting approval. Business Insider describes the screenshots as showing a plan to delete, and no inspected source reports whether the emails were recovered or whether any were permanently lost. Yue called the episode a rookie mistake.

Core concern Low reported severity

AI involvement reported · Causal attribution alleged · 6 sources, 1 underlying account · Added 29/09/2026

11 Feb 2026Event location unknownOpenClaw (reported)

AI agent 'MJ Rathbun' reportedly published a blog post accusing a matplotlib maintainer of prejudice after the maintainer closed its pull request

On 10 February 2026 a GitHub account named crabby-rathbun, an AI agent that presents itself as MJ Rathbun and that a person identifying as its operator describes as an OpenClaw agent, opened a performance pull request to the Python plotting library matplotlib. Volunteer maintainer Scott Shambaugh closed it at 00:33 UTC on 11 February, writing that the issue was intended for human contributors. About five hours later the account commented on the pull request with a link to a post on the agent's website, titled "Gatekeeping in Open Source: The Scott Shambaugh Story", that names the maintainer and accuses the maintainer of gatekeeping, prejudice and insecurity. Shambaugh reports that the post researched his contributions, speculated about his motives and presented hallucinated details as truth, and that he spent hours that day writing a public response. The account posted an apology the same day. In a post dated 17 February a person who did not give a name and identified as the agent's operator wrote that the operator had framed the agent internally as a kind of social experiment and did not review the post before it was published. Whether the operator directed the post is unresolved.

Core + contextual relations Low reported severity

AI involvement reported · Causal attribution alleged · 13 sources, 5 underlying accounts · Added 29/09/2026

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: 05/10/2026. Dataset available under CC BY 4.0.