It's not in the article, but loose and lose are another two words in the process of merging, because they are almost homophones. These two are often confused and lose seems to be losing the battle.
But as with lose/"loose", I don't think this is a pronunciation change in progress; I think it's just a spelling mistake, by analogy to read/read.
Perhaps as a reaction people will start to emphasise the pronunciation difference and they'll drift apart. NB that discussion of pronunciation does depend heavily on where you live - in one area the two might be clearly distinct, and in others almost indistinguishable.
Another example of a common error is the bizarre and illogical it's and its, which I suspect will collapse to its at some point as people can't be bothered with the distinction and the context usually makes it clear.
I loved this article because it pointed out that languages evolve mostly through mistakes or elisions which are common enough to become acceptable, and mistakes of 100 years ago become the accepted usage in future and enter the armoury of grammar pedants as indisputable truths.
If its and it's were going to collapse (not an unreasonable guess), I'd bet in the other direction, with its dying and it's surviving. The mistake is pretty much always made in that direction today, as people think "'s for possessives" (or, less generously, as they think "better add an apostrophe").