I don't agree, I feel you misrepresented the tone and the meaning by twisting it into:
> preaching the benefits of technological conformism by saying everyone should use the popular and boring technology of the day.
This is a disingenuous way to describe the article.
The article is just saying that when you're writing important programs that matter for your business, use the most stable technology that has the features you need. Because it is stable, and has the most community resources. In other words, don't gamble your business on risky technology choices just because they're new.
That's difficult to argue with IMO, especially when the author explicitly endorses experimenting with personal projects.