In my view, it would depend on the kind of mistake. If we're talking about mistakes in general, no writer is immune to it. In my many years of writing, I have made few minor mistakes too (mostly some API or code snippets not working the way it's supposed to). When readers encounter them, they bring it to my attention in the comments section, or over email. My response is to always thank them and make edits to the article.
If the mistakes are trivial, then it's okay. But if there's a major mistake or flaw w.r.t the very fundamentals of how something works, or logical errors/fallacies, or strawmanning, then my feeling is that the author should have spent more time in research before embarking to write the article, and also should consider proof-reading to ensure that they do not happen again.
I've seen more of this happening in web3 / blockchain puff-pieces lately - for instance claims such as cryptocurrencies are great investments because blockchains are unhackable - and this tells me that the author is coming to conclusions without doing their due diligence and research. I personally find it hard to be okay with such mistakes.
If it's an opinionated piece, it also helps to put some disclaimer along the lines of - "the ecosystem/circumstances might change in few years" if that isn't immediately obvious to the readers.
For further actions, you may consider blocking this person and/or reporting abuse
We're a place where coders share, stay up-to-date and grow their careers.
In my view, it would depend on the kind of mistake. If we're talking about mistakes in general, no writer is immune to it. In my many years of writing, I have made few minor mistakes too (mostly some API or code snippets not working the way it's supposed to). When readers encounter them, they bring it to my attention in the comments section, or over email. My response is to always thank them and make edits to the article.
If the mistakes are trivial, then it's okay. But if there's a major mistake or flaw w.r.t the very fundamentals of how something works, or logical errors/fallacies, or strawmanning, then my feeling is that the author should have spent more time in research before embarking to write the article, and also should consider proof-reading to ensure that they do not happen again.
I've seen more of this happening in web3 / blockchain puff-pieces lately - for instance claims such as cryptocurrencies are great investments because blockchains are unhackable - and this tells me that the author is coming to conclusions without doing their due diligence and research. I personally find it hard to be okay with such mistakes.
If it's an opinionated piece, it also helps to put some disclaimer along the lines of - "the ecosystem/circumstances might change in few years" if that isn't immediately obvious to the readers.