I don't think the author did anything wrong. The thesis of the article is that LLMs can be confidently wrong about things and to be wary of blindly trusting them.
It's a message a lot of non-technical people, in particular, need to hear. Showing egregious examples drives that point home more effectively than if they simply showed an LLM being a little wrong about something.
My family members that love LLMs are somewhat unhealthy with them. They think of them as all knowing oracles rather than confident bullshitters. They are happily asking them about their emotional, financial, or business problems and relying heavily on the advice the LLMs dish out (rather than doing second order research).
It's a message a lot of non-technical people, in particular, need to hear. Showing egregious examples drives that point home more effectively than if they simply showed an LLM being a little wrong about something.
My family members that love LLMs are somewhat unhealthy with them. They think of them as all knowing oracles rather than confident bullshitters. They are happily asking them about their emotional, financial, or business problems and relying heavily on the advice the LLMs dish out (rather than doing second order research).