Any python programmer would tell you: Starting a new project in 2022 in Python 2.5 is professional malpractice.
But that's what the original post seems to be saying: That Perl 5 has somehow managed to fix any of what was fundamentally wrong with it. ...and that couldn't be further from the truth. And people in this thread are saying that maybe they should have another look into Perl 5 as a serious option for starting out a new codebase in 2022. ...and that's a very bad idea.
Sure: If you started out a new codebase in Perl 5 in 2022, there are coding standards you could adopt to avoid getting yourself into a pickle where string encodings are concerned. But without the interpreter helping you out on that front, it'll produce ugly code, and take mental discipline and disciplined code reviewing practices on a team. It's solving a problem that Python solves for you so much more easily and effectively. You could go with Perl 6 / Raku, but why would you? What does it have to recommend it over Python or Ruby, other than a Perl programmer's nostalgia for being a little Perl-like?
You could say the transition from Perl 5 to Perl 6 is just like the transition from Python 2 to Python 3. The difference is: Perl is simply late by at least a decade.
The point that the article is trying to refute, namely that Perl is for dinosaurs, in my mind just absolutely stands.