I haven't even read the article and hence don't really have an opinion either way, but "[not] constructive" and "free of evidence" seem like pretty specific criticisms to me.

Given that Uber is infamous for its extreme NIH syndrome, unnecessarily reinventing the wheel and spending enormous amounts of dev effort to create internal versions of products that already exist, I think it's relevant to the article to point out that the author almost probably had a key role in that culture, and what his philosophy leads to if taken unchecked.