I literally posted the links to the AOT Python compiler and to the C++ interpreter.
> general real world implementation
By this they mean the real-world-implementation that is in general use, which in this case is interpreted.
Yes, Python can be compiled and C++ can be interpreted. 99% of the time, they're not though.
When somebody says X language is interpreted, they mean that the most common and widely implementation is an interpreter. That's a useful bit of information to know about a language. "Correcting" them and saying that all languages can be interpreted OR compiled, doesn't really add anything of value to the discussion, other than to label yourself as a pedant.
On one hand, the conception from the 90s based on the most common Python implementation, on the other - a compiler that saves us tons of money. Which one adds value again?
That would be important in high-school debate club. In the real world, most people don't care about obscure edge cases and pedantry. In the industry vernacular, Python is an "interpreted language" and C++ is a "compiled language". Arguing against that in anything other than a highly (highly!) specialized context is just lighting candles in the wind.