I don't think Darwin himself said anything about the randomness of the mutations, and of course was not aware of DNA and how things were encoded. I guess followers of Darwin may have said all sorts of things but the paper doesn't seem to contradict Darwinian evolution as described by Darwin.

I see the paper says "central tenet of neo-Darwinism that mutations are random...". I'm not that up on neo-Darwinism whatever it is.

(I looked at Wikipedia and it seems neo-Darwinism is the term for the Darwin like thinking of the time so maybe the paper contradicts last years neo-Darwinism but not next years?)