I didn't get that from the article at all. The point that blockchains haven't done away with trust is an important one. That the argument that a post-fork blockchain would be less trustworthy than it was before the fork gets made so often tells me this article offers useful information. (The issue with forks isn't whether or not they do occur, but rather whether or not they can occur. A fork that can occur is a fork that just hasn't occurred yet.)
