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

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.

1 2024
Reported severity Low
More filters: AI relation, use, setting, sources and responses
Clear filters

1 of 1005 published cases

Export JSONExport CSV
Jan 2024Event location unknownDPD chatbot

Customer says DPD's AI support chatbot could not help him trace a missing parcel and, when tested, swore and criticised DPD; the firm disabled its AI element

In January 2024 a DPD customer who was trying to trace a missing parcel through the delivery firm's online chat could not get useful information from its chatbot, according to the Guardian. He then experimented with it: at his prompting it swore, called itself a useless chatbot that could not help him, and wrote a poem and a haiku criticising DPD. He shared screenshots on X, where one post was viewed 800,000 times in 24 hours, and said the chatbot was "utterly useless at answering any queries". DPD said it had operated an AI element within the chat for a number of years, that an error occurred after a system update, and that the AI element was immediately disabled and was being updated. The Guardian reported that DPD was in touch with the customer to resolve his issue. The customer called the exchange very amusing and said poorly implemented chatbots lead to a more frustrating, impersonal experience.

Core concern Low reported severity Internal Action

AI involvement supported · Causal attribution supported · 2 sources · Added 29/10/2026

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: 29/10/2026. Dataset available under CC BY 4.0.