My take on the underlying point is that there's a good reason not to use events for every system everywhere. That reason is cost: not cost as in "we can save a bit of money", but cost as in "collecting all our events would double our infrastructure budget". Traces (correlated bundles of events) and metrics (aggregated events, and also other stuff that has nothing to do with events, but let's ignore that) are an attempt to solve the problems caused when you've exhausted the limits of shoving events into a table.

I think GPs point is that sure, you can shove events into a table, but this is just structured logging. It doesn't need to be called observability 2.0 because it's really observability 0.5: the baseline you start with before you need traces or metrics derived from events. All the observability 2.0 hype and the love hearts are a sales pitch from a CTO explaining why you shouldn't shoot yourself in the foot with an unnecessarily heavyweight observability implementation when your log volume is small.