> People who believe correctness is important, and people who think continuous deployment

I don't see why these exclude each other? You can easily have both, through e.g. powerful type systems (a la Haskell) and still use continuous deployment.

> I interpret it as saying average developer mindset needs to shape up.

I think you're giving Uncle Bob too much leeway. If you go through his other posts it should be a bit more clear, but he is very much focused on the programmer being at fault. Heck, in one (as the other commenter pointed out) of his posts he even says that it's never the languages fault (which is obviously wrong, you can eliminate wrong behaviour with good language design).

Another example is http://blog.cleancoder.com/uncle-bob/2017/01/13/TypesAndTest... where he states,

    So, no, type systems do not decrease the testing load. Not even the tiniest bit. But they can prevent some errors that unit tests might not see. (e.g. Double vs. Int)

Which is not just something taking out of context, it's more or less the thesis of his article. He really shows here his inexperience with what powerful type systems can do, and I can assure you that you can definitely cut down on a wealth of tests by modelling things in the type system instead - let the compiler do the job for you.