You could have just read the article to see what the author meant by AI Engineers. You also would have seen that the entire article was addressing a point you tried to make, and you could have responded to the arguments made in the article instead of, ya know, just sounding off based on having read nothing but the headline
I have read the article (though I will admit, quite quickly). The author's definition for AI is by any means not the single one out there, as they outlined themselves. I disagree with the premise that this will be the job of the decade, and I disagree with the premise that it is inherently different from the rest of software as a service. This is a tool, that can be used to solve certain problems, I doubt there is a useful differentiation. That's my point of view, it is antagonistic to what is presented there, and I don't see why you think it departs from usefully commenting on the article.
