Obviously wrong facts in main-site article - LLM use

[Torsten]

The other day I came across this article on the main site: "Canon EOS M50 vs EOS R50: Mirrorless Mayhem, Baby!"

As my mother in law likes my old EOS-M over her old Rebel I had a quick glance at the article. Not only did the article not provide any useful information, I was stunned to read this:

Canon EOS R50: Fresh, Fast, and RF-Fabulous​

Cons:

• No EVF? Sorry, viewfinder fans.

This is so wrong that the person who wrote that obviously has not had an R50 in hand nor has checked the specs or any review of the R50. Considering the way the article is worded I assume it was written by an LLM.

Either way, blatant spreading of wrong facts as part of a main-site article now makes me doubt every article on the site.

It's really disappointing.

 

[neuroanatomist]

The article (and those like it that appear on the main site but do not have a corresponding forum post) are written by a real person. In this case, that person seems to be confusing the R50 (which clearly has an EVF from the hump in the images shown) with the R50 V that lacks an EVF.

 

[alFR]

The article (and those like it that appear on the main site but do not have a corresponding forum post) are written by a real person.

Are you sure? Because:

• A web search for "Heidi Loren writer" or Heidi Loren photographer" turns up nothing apart from the articles here and a couple of people with similar names who don't look like the profile photo used on the article
• A google image search for the profile picture on the article turns up nothing apart from Canonrumors

Wouldn't a real person who is "a featured writer, photographer, and artist based in England with over a decade's experience" have at least some web presence?

 

[neuroanatomist]

1) CRguy said she’s a real person
2) She’s on LinkedIn

 

[EricN]

Are you sure? Because:

• A web search for "Heidi Loren writer" or Heidi Loren photographer" turns up nothing apart from the articles here and a couple of people with similar names who don't look like the profile photo used on the article
• A google image search for the profile picture on the article turns up nothing apart from Canonrumors

Wouldn't a real person who is "a featured writer, photographer, and artist based in England with over a decade's experience" have at least some web presence?

Some people feel completely repulsed by social media.. "Off the grid" kind of people.

 

[Torsten]

Are you sure? Because:

• A web search for "Heidi Loren writer" or Heidi Loren photographer" turns up nothing apart from the articles here and a couple of people with similar names who don't look like the profile photo used on the article
• A google image search for the profile picture on the article turns up nothing apart from Canonrumors

Wouldn't a real person who is "a featured writer, photographer, and artist based in England with over a decade's experience" have at least some web presence?

Some people feel completely repulsed by social media.. "Off the grid" kind of people.

This isn't about social media, as alFR said general search engines can't find the name on the web.

So a "off the grid" kind of person who is a "featured writer, photographer, and artist ... with over a decade's experience" managed to totally avoid her name being mentioned anywhere on the Internet for "over a decade" except here on Canonrumors.

Sounds totally plausible to me.

 

[EricN]

I'm unsure about "featured writer" these days, but you can certainly sell photos and drawings/paintings without being on the web. There is also the possibility of using a pseudonym. Of course, this is Canon Rumors, so R3 was really R1, Canon is doomed, and the Earth is flat.

 

[grantmasterflash]

The article (and those like it that appear on the main site but do not have a corresponding forum post) are written by a real person. In this case, that person seems to be confusing the R50 (which clearly has an EVF from the hump in the images shown) with the R50 V that lacks an EVF.

I don't think you understand that in thus case a real person writing it makes it worse. AI getting it wrong is one thing, a person that doesn't bother bringing up the specs on a camera when writing an article on a camera site undermines the article, the author and the site.

 

[neuroanatomist]

I don't think you understand that in thus case a real person writing it makes it worse. AI getting it wrong is one thing, a person that doesn't bother bringing up the specs on a camera when writing an article on a camera site undermines the article, the author and the site.

Humans and AI make mistakes. In this case, it seems the OP made a mistake in assuming the article was written by AI. Actually, I can't even say that. The author credited with the piece is a real person, but that doesn't mean AI wasn't used to write the article.

It really doesn't matter which one included a blatantly false piece of information in the article, facts should be verified before articles are posted and that wasn't done. Definitely agree that it reflects poorly on the site.

 

[alFR]

2) She’s on LinkedIn

LinkedIn profiles usually come up on a Google search for me: the only UK-based one that came up here was someone involved in anti-fraud investigations who doesn't look like the photo presented as that of the article author. Pending further evidence to the contrary I still doubt the profile picture and name are real.

 

[neuroanatomist]

LinkedIn profiles usually come up on a Google search for me:

Put her name and London in the search field on LI. But you can believe what you want, including that CRguy is lying.