This inspired me to respond, because it feels like an attack. Maybe it's not?

• Higher expectations - why not? People are getting paid, why not be one of them?
• Harder to retain - see the previous point. There's no reason to stick in the same place because old outdated promotion processes are ridiculous. There's no more pensions. What do you get for loyalty? Usually nothing
• Distrust in senior leadership - what have they done to earn my trust? Usually they've done things in the other direction
• Outspoken comms - this seems to be in line with the others - the old guard seemingly didn't speak up and just took what they were given. Is it wrong to speak up when you are dissatisfied, on any front? I think not.
• Higher up the stack - meaning younger engineers aren't as familiar with some of the lower levels of the stack? I suppose that's fair, but it's also probably biased based on where you work, what you work on, who you work with. But also, it's the nature of the industry to build on top of solid building blocks. Should I be chastised as an engineer because I don't know how to reimplement TCP?
• Loves "bleeding edge" - I do think this has become a thing, and I'n not quite sure if it should be. Innovation is really important, so trying new tech is also really important. It's how you learn what works and what doesn't, and it's also how you improve from past failures/mistakes. But that doesn't mean something older is bad. The things that stick around, usually stick around for good reason.
• Gets stuck more easily - Maybe this is true in general, but you can't apply that to everyone.
• Learns differently - I don't know how the older generations learned, so I can't really compare.