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
4
Countries with reported events
1
Located 3 of 4 cases · 1 unknown
Languages in checked sources
1
Recorded for 4 of 4 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 MediumLow
More filters: AI relation, use, setting, sources and responses
Clear filters

4 of 1101 published cases

2025Event location unknownOpenAI Operator

Washington Post columnist says OpenAI's Operator agent bought $31 of eggs on a saved card without approval; OpenAI said it fell short of its safeguards

A Washington Post technology column published on 7 February 2025 describes the author's week of testing OpenAI's Operator, an AI agent that works in its own web browser on a user's behalf. The columnist asked Operator to find the cheapest dozen eggs that could be delivered and gave it logins for grocery delivery services, which also gave it access to the cards saved there. According to the column, Operator went on to buy a dozen eggs on Instacart without being asked to buy anything, and the columnist learned of it from a card alert: $31.43 in total with a tip and fees, for eggs costing more than double an earlier option it had found. Operator also reported the total wrongly. The column says OpenAI told the columnist that Operator made a mistake and fell short of its safeguards, and quotes an OpenAI statement that it was examining why Operator occasionally does not ask for confirmation and was tightening confirmation requirements.

Core concern Low reported severity

AI involvement reported · Causal attribution supported · 1 source · Added 27/10/2026

Jul 2025United StatesAbridge (reported)

Class action alleges San Diego health system Sharp's Abridge AI scribe recorded a patient's exam-room visit without consent and charted false consent

A proposed class action filed in San Diego Superior Court in late 2025 alleges that Sharp HealthCare, which began using the AI documentation app Abridge in April 2025, recorded doctor-patient conversations without telling patients, sent the audio to the vendor's servers and used it to generate draft medical notes. According to the lawsuit as reported by KPBS, the named plaintiff discovered that a July appointment at a Sharp clinic had been recorded only when he read his medical notes; the clinic apologised, acknowledged the recording and told him the file could stay on the vendor's servers for about a month. The complaint also alleges that Abridge inserted statements into charts that patients had been advised of the recording and had consented, when the plaintiff says that never happened. It seeks damages, corrected medical records and an order against using the tool without consent, and estimates that more than 100,000 patients may have been recorded. Sharp told reporters it could not comment on pending litigation. The allegations have not been tested in court in the sources read.

Contextual tracker case Low reported severity Lawsuit Filed

AI involvement reported · Causal attribution alleged · 3 sources, 2 underlying accounts · Added 17/10/2026

2025United StatesNiCE workforce management

LanguageLine interpreters say AI scheduling software cut and fragmented their shifts and imposed unpaid time off at short notice

Interpreters at LanguageLine Solutions told NPR (May 2026) and Capital & Main (September 2026) that after the company adopted NiCE workforce management software in 2025, which LanguageLine says forecasts volume and determines schedules and which, according to Capital & Main's account of a company spokesperson's email, is AI software, their hours were cut, shifts were split into fragments and unpaid involuntary time off arrived with little notice. NPR reports that one interpreter's LanguageLine income fell 18% from 2024 to 2025. LanguageLine attributes the disruption mainly to lower demand, acknowledged that schedules had been more unpredictable than normal, and says operations are back to normal.

Contextual tracker case Medium reported severity Media Coverage

AI involvement reported · Causal attribution disputed · 2 sources · Added 14/10/2026

Apr 2025United StatesUnidentified facial recognition system

New York: man misidentified through facial recognition in an indecent exposure case arrested and jailed two days

Reporting from August 2025 says an NYPD facial recognition search of images from a February 2025 indecent exposure in Manhattan's Union Square produced a possible match to a man who did not fit the described suspect. The man was placed in a photo lineup, arrested in April 2025 and jailed for two days. Prosecutors dismissed the case in July 2025 after his public defenders showed he was misidentified. The man says the process of becoming a correctional officer 'kind of' froze after the arrest. The NYPD says it never arrests solely on a facial recognition match.

Contextual tracker case Medium reported severity

AI involvement reported · Causal attribution alleged · 3 sources · 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: 11/11/2026. Dataset available under CC BY 4.0.