What the author said for CS can easily be replaced by leadership, communication skills, analytical skills, integrative thinking, and many other things. Majoring in CS because of this? Hell no.
Yes, for centuries literacy has been crucial to individual success, but that did not mean everyone must major in literature. Instead, it simply meant those studying engineering, business, and etc had to take a class or two in communication. The business major going into management consulting has to have excellent communication skills, but at the core, it's his business, analytical, and business communication skills that really matter.
Perhaps in the future everyone will be required to code to some degree, but that does not mean completely going out of your way and spending endless hours for a CS degree "just because you will have to code". The fact that the author mentioned you are concentrating on the "hack aspect" of CS makes the argument even more ignorant. The argument might have been semi-valid had it been for the validity of studying machine learning, data mining and pattern recognition, and other more mathematical aspects.
But hacking? Hell no. Ask the financial analyst whom has to code. Is "hacking" more important, or his/her mathematical skills. Going back to the literature example: ask a senior executive: is his strong ability in literature what got him there?