One more article based on the assumption that web development covers the full span of software development...
Also, I do think it's a little dishonest not to point out that one of the recommended products is made by his employer
I don't think so. The gist of the reasoning is that it's better to have more numerous small failures that are fixed quickly than rare but catastrophic failures. I think that's true even when you have an SLA, which is probably why it's broadly in line with the principles in Google's Site Reliability Engineering book
Others have made the point though that this all goes out of the window when talking about safety-critical engineering (Therac-25, 737Max etc)