Hypermedia never really got popular with REST-like APIs - to the point that when an API actually implements hypermedia navigation, the term RESTful simply isn't enough to distinguish it from any other "RESTful" web APIs. REST has become an catch-all term or any resource-based web APIs and new names like Hypermedia API have been coined to focus on the hypermedia concept.
I don't really want to advocate the usage of incorrect terms, but I think that the general modern interpretation of REST simply means using uniform URLs and HTTP verbs for most people. It's not correct, but anyone who knows Fieldings definition, should also know that many others don't. On the other hand, anyone who knows REST only by observing how existing "RESTful" APIs are implemented, won't know what you are talking about when you mention lesser known REST constraints like HATEOAS or on-demand code. Fielding may not like it, but I think it is to late to get back to the original definition*. And let's be honest: If you hear someone talk about his REST API for the first time, you instantly assume it does not include hypermedia, don't you?
Insisting on the correct definition of RESTful usually only creates additional confusion. As with many terms that have changed their meaning over time or that the masses simply adopted wrong, I appreciate if someone knows the original definition but I wouldn't correct anyone who is using the broader modern interpretation of REST.
* and also to late to establish new terms for REST-like non-hypermedia APIs, for that matter. How should we call them anyway? ... RESTish ?