Usually, when people claim to have refuted our crappy old article on Javascript crypto, they have some misguided but at least potentially falsifiable argument for having accomplished that; for instance, "there are browsers with secure RNGs now".

You don't even have that. From what I can tell, you have literally no argument at all; instead, you "agree" with the article while drawing exactly the opposite conclusion that the article draws, then point out again and again how much users don't want to install things, as if that changed the security of this system at all.