Article, and tone used, shows lack of understanding of both Waterfall and Scrum/Agile and software development in general so it is only misinforming people further in my view, especially using such a bold title. Unfortunately Medium has no review system like a basic „thumb-up/down” so I'll share my comment.

Assessing only headline sentences of Agile to assign them general project issues and those that predate Agile by far shows to me that if using Agile people should at least do a Agile developer certification to understand the methodology itself.

Instead it happens that people do bad Scrum/Agile, as they were doing bad Waterfall and as they would do with any other process because they have problems which they are not solving.

Technical debt, poor documentation, over-engineering, under-engineering, missing deadlines. doing what client wants but then doesn't, is always going to exist and has to be tackled in any case, under a development methodology which was chosen where one can bring more benefit that the other to help solving these.

It won't solve company issues, software bugs or bad hires.