Not really, by most indications AI seems to be an amplifier more than anything else. If you have strong discipline and quality control processes it amplifies your throughput, but if you don't, it amplifies your problems. (E.g. see the DORA 2025 report.)
So basically things will still go where they were always going to go, just a lot faster. That's not necessarily a bad thing.
I meant it more as an observation than an optimistic prediction, really :-)
The article is sound, but it's focus on large public failures disregards the vast, vast, vast majority of the universe of software projects that nobody really thinks about, because they mostly just work -- websites and mobile apps and games and internal LoB CRUD apps and cloud services and the huge ecosystem of open source projects and enterprise and hobby software.
Without some consideration of that, we cannot really generalize this article to reflect the "success rate" of our industry.
That said, I think the acceleration introduced by AI is overall a "Good Thing (tm)" simply because, all else being equal, it's generally better to fail faster rather than later.
"If you do everything right that you weren't doing before, but with 80% fewer people and the Lie Generator that doesn't work, then you will be successful."
Edited to add: To clarify, I meant that if an organization was going to deliver a billion-dollar boondoggle of a project, AI will not change that outcome, but it WILL help deliver that faster. Which is why I meant it's not necessarily a bad thing, because as in software, it's generally better to fail faster.
So basically things will still go where they were always going to go, just a lot faster. That's not necessarily a bad thing.