One rather prominent case would be Tailwind. v4 made breaking changes in the way Tailwind is set up, requiring different packages and syntax. However, if you ask an LLM how to set up Tailwind on your Vite & React app, it will confidently list the setup steps for Tailwind v3, which no longer work.
At times I would see people daily asking for help with their broken Tailwind setups, and almost always it was them trying to use Tailwind v4 the v3 way because some AI told them so.
This was so unbelievably obnoxious when I first started trying to use Cursor last year at some point. Also because if you tried to not use tailwind the AI would eventually try to force it in anyway. I don’t know how it is nowadays but that was so frustrating and funny at the same time. And! When I setup Tailwind v4 ahead of time, got it working, and told the AI about the v4 changes, it would “correct” it to v3 anyway. Another fun “metric” was to ask an AI how to setup react because it was still recommending create-react-app though nowadays I’m sure it’ll be harder to find any model that still has that in its training set.
JavaScript's behaviour in this case is consistent if we accept that JavaScript would always rather compute the next-best gibberish than throw an error.
While `1 / 0` is not a valid operation, it can be interpreted using limits. If `x` approaches 0, then `1 / x` will approach `Infinity`, hence JavaScript's result of this operation.
But with `0 / 0`, there is no unambiguous interpretation, so JavaScript defaults to `NaN` as its indicator for when a number is expected, but not received in valid form.
I'm not defending this behaviour of the language, just pointing out that there aren't "two different ways" of wrong behaviour at display here.
At times I would see people daily asking for help with their broken Tailwind setups, and almost always it was them trying to use Tailwind v4 the v3 way because some AI told them so.