I think we've done a good job of debunking his points regarding age and knowledge decay. I'd like to address his points regarding prestige, foreignization (or, outsourcing, to put it in terms we know), and working conditions.

I don't know where he's coming from (his Twitter profile lists his location as Manhattan, but very little else) but he is absolutely wrong with programming being a low prestige career. People have seen The Social Network. They've seen programmers become millionaires and even billionaires while making tools and products that they use on a daily, or even hourly basis. I would argue that programmers, these days, are valued more by society than lawyers and accountants. Lawyers and accountants, now, are seen as a symptom of "what's wrong with this country today". They're viewed as being cronies of the 1% fat-cats, helping them loot the rest of the country whilst everyone else starves. Programmers, on the other hand, hearken back to a time where Americans still built things and were very good at it. There's a good reason that the tech. industry is the most widely admired industry in America. There's a good reason why technology brands (like Google and Apple) consistently make the top-ten in admired brands nationwide. Americans rightly look at the technology industry as a source of national pride. They look at the investment banking industry and see it as a source of national shame.

Outsourcing, even in 2007, was far more of a potential threat than it was a real threat. Today, I'd argue that it's not even a potential threat. As the prestige of programming has grown (see paragraph above), more and more people in third world countries are aspiring to become programmers. Unfortunately, this increase in demand has led to a massive erosion in average programmer quality in those places. There are lots of schools in India that are little more than diploma mills - graduating "programmers" that can't even copy/paste code. This combined with increased competition and increased salaries for the good programmers means that outsourcing isn't even close to being a "no-brainer" economic decision. Companies are realizing this. Many large companies (like Best Buy and Target) to name two from my hometown, are bringing IT back as they see that 1) outsourcing never produced the expected cost savings and 2) solid IT infrastructure is a competitive advantage. I would expect the discussion around outsourcing to be a far more nuanced one in the future, as the initial wave ebbs further and outsourcing becomes more of a way to get around visa issues and immigration policy than a way to produce automatic cost savings in projects.

Finally, working conditions. Has this guy even looked at the perks Google gives its employees? Heck even outside Google, Microsoft, and other "tier 1" software firms, it's becoming normal for programmers to have two, or even three 1920x1080 monitors. Yes, there are places that treat their programmers like crap and give them insufficient tools but those places are feeling more pressure every day as their best programmers see the better working conditions elsewhere and leave. Finally, I can't name too many programmers who've routinely worked 100 hour weeks. 80-100 hour weeks tend to be the norm, though, at many law firms, trading desks, and other professions that the author singles out as being more desirable than programming. Given that, I don't see how the author can claim that these professions have better working conditions than programming.