IMO Continuous Delivery is kind of a nothingburger vague process term that lots of people can (and do) talk themselves into saying/thinking they are doing. That's kind of the theme of this blog post BTW. Continuous Deployment is the actual indisputable thing (you either automatically deploy new commits in mainline or you don't) that gives you the real benefits but which lots of orgs aren't yet doing.
Even their process is very much like true CI/CD but packages only get into "proposed" archive (still accessible to the public) without further human vetting (I mean, a code review is human vetting too).
I personally want my desktop/server apps to automatically update according to traditional LTS rules (no breaking changes, just bugfixes).
Agreed. I'm all-in for Continuous Deployment. Continuous Delivery is a half-measure at best.
That's not automated. CD (however you (re)define it) is about automation and removing people from the loop.
As long as you have manual processes, it's not continuous.