[majewsky]

That doesn't follow from the title as it stands. Automation not "matching" human skill means that automation cannot cover 100% of operations performed by humans, but it doesn't say what the percentage actually is. Could be 0% (like your rhetorical hyperbole insinuates), could be 99.999% (not yet probably), could be 80% (more likely).

[robertlagrant]

It's not my rhetorical hyperbole. It's in the article title, which doesn't leave any room for the millions of tasks at which automation far exceeds human skill. That would have been "Apple learned automation can't always match human skill".