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
3
Countries with reported events
—
Located 0 of 3 cases · 3 unknown
Languages in checked sources
2
Recorded for 3 of 3 cases
27Core concern
AI communicated, acted for, depicted or impersonated 3Contextual cases
AI made a decision or claim about someone

3 cases have no reviewed AI-to-person relation yet: 0 not yet reviewed and 3 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.

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 20252 2026
Reported severity MediumLow
More filters: AI relation, use, setting, sources and responses
Clear filters

3 of 585 published cases

Export JSONExport CSV
2026Event location unknownGrok

Grok reportedly disclosed an adult performer's legal name and birthdate in an X reply, followed by reported impersonation accounts and leak-site posts under the legal name

In early 2026 (404 Media and the performer's 19 February post say early February, while Stern reports she found the reply weeks after it appeared) an X user replied to a clip of adult performer Siri Dahl, asking who the performer was and what her name was, and tagged Grok. According to 404 Media, Grok answered with her stage name, her birthdate and her legal name, and the user likely wanted only to know which performer appeared in the clip. Dahl has used the stage name since 2012 according to 404 Media, and she says she had paid for data removal services for at least six years to keep the legal name private. She reports that impersonating Facebook accounts and leak-site posts under the legal name then appeared and that the name spread across hundreds of websites. 404 Media reports that users asked Grok for the make and model of her car and her address without an accurate reply, and that she is calling family members to put defensive plans in place. Grok's reply to her protest said the details were already public, which she denies. Where Grok obtained the name is unknown. Dahl spoke publicly about the event and asked 404 Media to publish her legal name. This record omits the legal name and birthdate.

Core + contextual relations Medium reported severity

AI involvement reported · Causal attribution alleged · 6 sources, 3 underlying accounts · 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

Jun 2025Event location unknownChatGPT

Delaware court finds Krafton fired three Unknown Worlds executives without valid cause in a takeover that followed its CEO's ChatGPT strategy

A Delaware Court of Chancery opinion of 16 March 2026 finds that in June 2025 the CEO of Krafton, after being warned that a dismissal with cause would not eliminate a contingent earnout obligation, consulted ChatGPT. The chatbot answered that the earnout would be difficult to cancel, suggested an internal task force (Project X) whose mandate was to negotiate a deal or execute a takeover of the studio, and prepared a "Response Strategy to a No-Deal Scenario" that recommended locking down the studio's Steam and console publishing rights and build-pipeline access. The court found that Krafton followed most of these recommendations over the next month: it locked the studio out of its Steam publishing rights, which severed the studio's practical ability to launch its game and forced the studio's CEO to the negotiating table, posted a message on the studio's websites, and on 1 July 2025 sent termination letters to the studio's two founders and its CEO. The court held that Krafton breached the acquisition agreement by terminating the three executives without valid Cause and by improperly seizing operational control, reinstated the studio's CEO and extended the earnout period by 258 days. The opinion records that the Krafton CEO had begun exploring options including firing the executives before consulting ChatGPT, and does not find that ChatGPT recommended the terminations. Krafton said it disagreed with the ruling. On 1 July 2026 Krafton announced a mutual settlement with the studio and the three executives dismissing all pending proceedings; IGN, citing Bloomberg, reported that the studio's CEO stepped down as part of it.

Contextual tracker case Medium reported severity

AI involvement supported · Causal attribution unclear · 4 sources, 2 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: 10/10/2026. Dataset available under CC BY 4.0.