OOP, as defined as a set of principles, is a complete load of horse shit. There are many more reasons other than what the article states as to why it doesn't deal with realities of software (e.g. data oriented programming solves some of them). OOP principles are likely one of the reasons it takes so long to train fresh-out-of-college employees, as they first need to learn how to forget that utter bullshit.

However, that does not mean that OOP languages are a bust. It is only the OOP principles that are a problem.

So far my experience goes, I've learned to mostly stop creating analogues of real-world things (as OOP principles would have it), except where it makes sense to, and instead use OOP features to create distinct responsibilities. Turns out OOP languages are identical to, let's say, "responsibility oriented programming" languages.

OOP languages can also be used for other things, as previously mentioned: data oriented programming. DOP is used widely in gamedev. Gamedev also happens to be an industry that heavily uses an OOP language: C++.

Hate the principles, not the languages. There's a big difference.