I have to disagree. For its length and scope it summed up the current problem nicely and clearly pointed out that the thinking that got us into this mess won't

I have to disagree. For its length and scope it summed up the current problem nicely and clearly pointed out that the thinking that got us into this mess won't get us out of it, to paraphrase Einstein. I don't think the intent of the article was to answer the question of what to do, but rather to point out its currently intractable nature. Furthermore, he points out that he's even "done something about it," wrote a catch-all library, but that it hasn't had the anticipated or desired effect. Clearly, something else is afoot here. Where next?