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
1
Countries with reported events
1
Located 1 of 1 cases · 0 unknown
Languages in checked sources
1
Recorded for 1 of 1 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 Low
More filters: AI relation, use, setting, sources and responses
Clear filters

1 of 1005 published cases

Apr 2019United KingdomHM Passport Office photo checker

UK passport photo checker told Black applicants their closed mouths looked open, they say; a BBC test found darker-skinned women flagged more often

The UK government's online passport application uses an automated face-detection check that tells applicants when it thinks an uploaded photo breaks the rules, which include a neutral expression and a closed mouth. In September 2019 PA reported that a young Black man renewing his passport online said the checker mistook his lips for an open mouth, and that to submit the photo anyway he had to write in a comment box that his mouth was closed and he just had big lips. PA also reported that a Black educational technologist said the system told her that her eyes looked closed and that it could not find the outline of her head; she told the BBC she uploaded 10 photographs over a week and each was rated poor, and PA reported that the Passport Office tweeted that it was sorry the service had not worked as it should. In October 2020 a BBC investigation reported that a Black student said she was wrongly told her mouth looked open on each of five photos and got one accepted only by writing a note challenging the verdict. The BBC fed 1,130 passport-style photos of politicians into the checker and found that photos of dark-skinned women were graded poor quality 22% of the time against 14% for light-skinned women; it reported that documents released under a 2019 freedom of information request showed the Home Office knew of the problem but judged overall performance good enough to launch. The Home Office said applicants can override the check, that the checker is a customer aid, and that its systems are improving.

Contextual tracker case Low reported severity Media Coverage

AI involvement reported · 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.