This is just flame war. Obviously using the right job for the right problem makes sense. There is no silver bullet.

This was not so obvious a few years ago. A lot of people believed that OOP always made programming better, and was a requirement to creating maintainable programs. Some still do.

FP had its little Joe-programmer renaissance ca. 2007 slowing in 2009. It's been a while since anything approaching a majority thought OO-or-bust for all purposes, perhaps 2004-ish.

Actually the author clearly states as much:

"Object-oriented programming [...] is a powerful idea. It truly is. But it's not always the best idea."

The problem is the opionated flamebait title submitted to Hacker News, the text of which is nowhere to be seen in the Google+ post itself.

I don't really understand the justification for "There is no silver bullet". How do we know? There may very well be a silver bullet, after all, we've already had some!

Programming now using modern tools is at least an order of magnitude more productive than programming using punch cards or other methods used back in the day.

Why are we so sure that all the silver bullets are behind us?

Roughly half of the characters in your comment are part of platitude-phrases. By my count, exactly zero characters are about how to tell what the right tools are, which would at least have been making a concrete claim. This is unsatisfying.