>Given that, how is one supposed to reply critically to such a post? I'm genuinely curious and open to suggestions, as it's something I'm clearly not good at.
Link to or describe a better approach and explain specifically why it's better.
Your only specific part was that it's slow to deploy a new service which for most organizations is somewhere on the bottom of their priority list. In fact many organizations probably prefer slow deployments as that implicitly discourages unnecessary services and infrastructure bloat. That in turn lowers the long term maintenance burden and technical debt. Five hundred services that are in reality owned by no team or whom no one knows about are not what you want in an organization.
