To the point of the article, sure, it was good enough, but it could be better, and if we're not striving for the best - if we're not valuing the expertise and practice that allows someone to hear a fractionally out-of-tune piano and recognize it immediately; if we're not valuing the technical expertise to then listen to that piano, recognize all of the tells, and know how to adjust them; if we're not valuing the notion that the piano sounding better is a net good in and of itself - then what's the purpose of us? In the long run, if we're just going to settle for mediocrity, what's the purpose of anything we're doing at all?
Sure, make the device that tunes the piano to the imperfect level it was at the beginning. Better piano tuning is a net good. But recognize the difference between a thousand pianos tuned very well and one perfectly tuned piano, and don't pretend the first is a replacement for the second.
(And, to the obvious point that, like, everyone in this thread is missing: Substitute "piano tuning" for anything you actually value. The point is excellence, not pianos.)
Sure, make the device that tunes the piano to the imperfect level it was at the beginning. Better piano tuning is a net good. But recognize the difference between a thousand pianos tuned very well and one perfectly tuned piano, and don't pretend the first is a replacement for the second.
(And, to the obvious point that, like, everyone in this thread is missing: Substitute "piano tuning" for anything you actually value. The point is excellence, not pianos.)