In theoretical terms, strong typing every, always is preferred. In practical terms, this devolves into a Java-esque nightmare of what's-the-type-for-the-parent-type-of-the-thing's-type absurdity. Where people stop using your system because they don't want a second job learning its Borges-esque comprehensive type encyclopedia.
In practical terms, bare minimum typing that prevents 80% of errors, but doesn't require gyrations to cover the remaining 20% works. And given a choice between the two, more software is going to be built in systems that function this way.
Does it break all the damn time? Yes. Does it still get more done? Yes.
I would have to say the opposite is true.
It's text based interfaces that have stood the test of time, and now even flourish in HTTP. We have more widely used text based interfaces than ever before where REST,HTML, XML and JSON seem to rule most machine-machine communication.
Strongly typed binary RPC such as DCOM and CORBA however are now nearly gone.
Unix itself, for example, won't last even 10 years. Look for it to be gone by the mid-late 1970s as it gets replaced by strongly-typed objects passed directly between applications to control our fusion-powered flying cars.
What will computing look like in 500 years? Do we really believe that we reached the pinnacle of OS development in the 1970s?
I know but my point is that the interface itself is still text.
We've learned a lot since the unix philosophy was created. One of those things is that, if you want software that lasts, software that performs well, you need to be strongly typed.
Plain text is as far from strongly typed as you can get. Passing plain text between programs in 2020 goes against everything we've learned in the last 50 years.