Languages do evolve, so by that criteria, yeah so what? For that matter, things crash, people die, mistakes are made. Doesn't mean you can't discuss them.
The big takeaway on this one, to me is that a moonshot is usually not just an ambitious project with a high risk of failure. No, a moonshot is typically an ambitious project with a high cost of success. There is a very big difference in that.
If you try and keep things low cost, then a moonshot is doomed to failure. If you are willing to set ambitious goals and pay whatever it takes to hit them, you have a solid chance of success.
The article takes issue with folks coopting a moonshot to say that it was nothing but clever people that succeeded against all odds. By that, some clever people use it as an excuse to play in projects that they think has a low chance of success. Hoping to find one where they are clever enough to beat chance.
Now, I confess this is appealing to me. I've been in teams where they tried to brainstorm a "moonshot" that would change the future. Note, they wanted to brainstorm it. Not to pay for it.