The article kinda beats itself with his examples. E.g. he includes javascript from adobe for a font. Like why is that?

I don't know if Adobe uses that for tracking, but they very well could and that's hard to deny. They could control everything his page, because he uses a font from them. Sometimes there are tradeoffs, but there's no possibly legit reason for this. A font is a static file that changes never. You don't need Javascript to load a font and you certainly don't need to include something from a thirdparty host.