The author appears to warp his argument and land his primary criticism on machines and not the people that program them. Which is odd - you should not learn to code because machines are not creative? Much like saying you shouldn't learn to draw because paper + pencils aren't creative...

Machines "aren't creative" is a naive assertion too (forgivable though because not everyone outside of our industry may be aware of the happenings) - there are some truly amazing programs people are building that can evolve creative solutions to many things that no human could ever dream of.