Speaking through my long white beard, I would say this is not trivially true. If we follow what the article says and say this is about survival in a particular

Speaking through my long white beard, I would say this is not trivially true. If we follow what the article says and say this is about survival in a particular niche, then yes, Programmers who are good at a specific job will eventually be replaced at that job, while programmers who are terrible at that job but not obviously so will tend to stay in that job. Thus, if you want to maintain the same piece of the same legacy application indefinitely, be terrible at at. Whereas, if you are good, do the job and move on. Whether that means moving upwards, or to new pastures, or embracing new technologies, being good means constantly renewing yourself. The caution in all of this is that if you fail to be good, not only will you be irreplaceable, but you will also be immobile. So, either polish your skills on a regular basis, or polish your Swingline stapler.