Such things may not have personhood but they do have internal reasoning, can be built to have real-world goals, can solve any "intelligence-bound" problem (like math or physics) better than any human, and can cause something like the Singularity to occur (which the essay was arguing against in the first place).

It seems that conceptualizing AIs as human-like is the #1 top mistake that leads people to think AIs are impossible (or, alternatively, safe once they're built). It's more enlightening to think of an AI as a cold mathematical machine that uses computational power to achieve whatever goal the original programmer specified, possibly increasing its own power in the process. It will happily eat your babies if it needs more atoms. Its lack of personhood won't save you.