Although the article is certainly worth reading, the title suggests that the alchemy has actually been achieved (in the author's broad sense), while the post deals with a theoretical possibility.
It sounds like practical applications are still more or less theoretical, though.
Is there really a difference? Isn't the name we give a material essentially just a shorthand for describing a pattern of behavior that its constituent particles are (mostly) adhering to?
At the moment we're up to the stage of having a theoretical framework for how to manipulate a given property through a driving field, along with some computational demonstrations that the method works. The major point is that the equations one derives from this method are quite broadly applicable, and generally speaking if you can show they work in silico, then a real-world implementation shouldn't be too far behind.
This article does not describe that level of transformation. Rather it's about making "lead behave like gold" as a material, but not as a lustrous metal of ravenous hording.