As the article points out, copies of MIT licensed code must include not only the copyright line but the whole damn license.
You'd still have to include the notice in any source distribution, but that's not really as onerous in my opinion, since you're already having to distribute all your source files, so what's just one more notice.
Of course, my projects normally use a language with a compiler that produces binaries. I'm not sure how this would apply to a language that keeps things in source form like javascript. Maybe webasm will become the new binary form? asm.js? minified javascript?
But neither MIT nor zlib require you to distribute any source files. With zlib it's pretty clear what's expected, but with MIT, I'm actually not sure what attribution if any is required in a binary-only distribution.
The way I've seen MIT interpreted most often is that you have to distribute the license and attribution even for binary only distribution, or distribution in binary form as part of a larger work.
But you're right the language does seem kind of vague on what "The Program" actually means.