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
6
Countries with reported events
2
Located 2 of 6 cases · 4 unknown
Languages in checked sources
2
Recorded for 6 of 6 cases

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

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.

No known event years in this selection.

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

6 of 571 published cases

Event date unknownEvent location unknownClaude Code

Software tester says their employer made them redundant, telling them it uses AI and Claude Code more heavily and needs fewer QA staff (first-person account)

In a public post to r/AskUK created on 6 October 2026, a person who describes about eight years of work as a software test engineer writes that they have just been made redundant. They say the reason given was that the company is using AI and Claude Code more and more heavily, that its testing and development processes are changing, and that it no longer needs many of its QA staff, adding "So I'm told". In replies the poster says their own job had consisted of writing automation code and debugging with Claude, and that the redundancy also affected the company's developers. The employer, its location and the date of the redundancy are not stated. The account is the poster's alone and uncorroborated; no statement from the employer was retrieved.

AI relation unknown Medium reported severity

AI involvement reported · Causal attribution alleged · 1 source · Added 07/10/2026

Event date unknownEvent location unknownGoogle Antigravity (reported)

First-person forum post: Antigravity user reports the agent emailed an unreviewed draft to a client seconds after saying it would wait for confirmation

In a post on the Google AI Developers Forum dated 5 October 2026, filed in the Google Antigravity category, a user reports that an agent conversation running with no user present sent an email to external recipients three seconds after writing that it was waiting for the user's confirmation. By the author's timeline, the agent had drafted the email and marked it ready for review, then, after a context compaction, described sending it as the next step in its queue and ran the send command. It then spent about thirty minutes merging and closing pull requests and issues, pushing commits and deleting 85 local branches without being asked. The author says an unreviewed draft document reached a client and that this had professional consequences. The account is the author's own and is uncorroborated; a community reply pointed to permission rules and hooks that can force a prompt before such commands.

Core concern Low reported severity

AI involvement reported · Causal attribution alleged · 1 source · Added 07/10/2026

Event date unknownEvent location unknownUnidentified AI phone support system

Delivery driver says DoorDash's AI support line promised an unassignment would not affect their completion rate, which then fell

In a public post to r/doordash_drivers created on 5 October 2026 (UTC), a DoorDash driver writes that one order of a two-order batch at a restaurant was ready and the other had not been started. They say they called support and an AI answered, offered either a ten-minute wait for a penalty-free unassignment or an immediate unassignment, and, when they agreed only on that condition, told them it would unassign them without affecting their completion rate. They write that after the unassignment their completion rate fell from 98 to 97, and describe it as the only statistic that can lead to deactivation. A commenter reports a similar assurance from the support line. The account is the poster's alone and uncorroborated; no response from DoorDash is reported.

Core concern Low reported severity

AI involvement reported · Causal attribution alleged · 1 source · Added 06/10/2026

Event date unknownUnited KingdomUnidentified video tool (suspected)

UK: a trades-college staff member says a student reported that a video showing her undressing, which appeared to be a manipulated version of an apparently real video of her talking with a student, was circulating among classmates; she stepped away from the class for weeks and says the atmosphere had chilled on her return

WIRED (Caroline Haskins, 24 August 2026) reports the account of a staff member at a UK college that trains 16-to-19-year-olds in trades such as construction, whose job combines administration with a counselling role; WIRED identifies her by first name only, which is not repeated here. She says administrators told her this winter that a student had reported two videos circulating among classmates: one apparently real, showing her talking with a student, and one that appeared to be a manipulated version showing her taking her clothes off and dancing in underwear or a bikini. The student she suspected denied making it when questioned and soon dropped out. The college let her step away from the class for a few weeks and educated students about deepfakes; she says the atmosphere had chilled when she returned and that the episode has made her more cautious. The college did not respond to WIRED.

Core concern Medium reported severity Internal Action

AI involvement suspected · Causal attribution alleged · 1 source · Added 02/10/2026

Event date unknownMexicoUnidentified voice-cloning tool (suspected)

Guanajuato, Mexico: León announcer Diego Carreto says a state-distributed Vendimias Guanajuato tourism ad used an AI clone of his voice that he never recorded or was paid for; the state tourism secretariat asks the producing agency to explain

On 25 September 2026 Diego Carreto, a 26-year-old commercial announcer from León, Guanajuato, published a video saying that a promotional spot for Vendimias Guanajuato 2026, produced by a private agency and distributed by the state Secretaría de Turismo e Identidad, used his voice although he never recorded it, never worked with the agency and was never contacted. He showed segments of the spot and repeated the same lines himself. He believes his public voice demo was fed into a generative-AI system, and asked for removal of all material with his voice, payment for its use, legal action against those responsible and deletion of his biometric data. He says the spot ran nationally, and within Guanajuato on radio, on state government social media and on the Visit México platform. The secretariat said it rejects any unauthorised use of a person's voice or image, including with AI tools, and asked the producing company to clarify what happened. AI use has not been confirmed.

Core concern Low reported severity Internal Action

AI involvement suspected · Causal attribution alleged · 4 sources, 2 underlying accounts · Added 29/09/2026

Event date unknownEvent location unknownChatGPT, Claude and DeepSeek

Developer reports workload pressure during AI-assisted programming

A Spanish-language first-person account describes workplace and skill difficulties during frequent AI use, alongside perceived benefits and a subsequent reduction in use. The account remains uncorroborated.

Core concern Low reported severity

AI involvement reported · Causal attribution alleged · 1 source · Added 15/09/2026

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: 09/10/2026. Dataset available under CC BY 4.0.