This is more of a list of random things that upsets the author. If I were going to write an article about "signs you're a bad essayist", this essay would provide a lot of examples ;)
But mostly I agree. I think later on his emphasis on database-related things is too heavy. Databases are just a library that some programs use; they really have nothing to do with programming in general. Oh, and I like object databases. Guess that makes me a moron who shouldn't be programming.
This is witty, but incorrect. Not every program needs a database; think about web browsers or games. So if you are writing the physics backend for a new game, you can still be a "good programmer" without knowing what relational algebra is.
Databases are a weird beast; people are wayyyy too religious about them. I guess that's what happens when a technology bills itself as the solution to every problem.
From section 5 of the "Signs that you shouldn't be a programmer" section:
Your program produces output to be read by another (eg: a browser), or implements a network protocol, and relies on the other party's software to be significantly tolerant to spec violations.
I think the author is referring to programmers who produce "semi-correct" HTML, only test in 1 browser (if they test at all) and expect everything to be acceptable.
As a separate example, I know our customers expect the CSV files that they generate for our program to run to work despite ambiguous data, incorrect / inconsistent number of fields, spelling mistakes, etc...
The reality is that folks who work at the level discussed in the document probably don't have the desire to actually read the article and improve themselves.
But mostly I agree. I think later on his emphasis on database-related things is too heavy. Databases are just a library that some programs use; they really have nothing to do with programming in general. Oh, and I like object databases. Guess that makes me a moron who shouldn't be programming.