Ray I agree with the conclusion of the source article, we need more humans to make the transition from mathematically negative to mathematically positive energy, because after that we will be reversing the damage done to date by our practices previously at profit.
The more people there are surviving, the more there will be to do the work of repair.
Think of it like a plant, the plant spends the infant part of its life withdrawing energy from the planet, the energy it needs to form leaves.
After that, it's dependence on energy to grow itself moves to the energy of the sun which is unlimited, it grows to thousands of times it's infant size, paying back the energy it took from the planet thousands of times, even millions of times over.
So we do need as many humans as possible after the transition, and actually even to make the efort of transitioning (the effort and resources needed to implement the required solar hydrogen domestic and community based infrastructure)
After that is done our behaviour becomes creative, just because we are in the creative enetgy source. All use of it as things other than heat is reduction of temperature.
Just by existing we will then be a creative force, instead of all destructive as stands.
We actually never can have too many humans, but as the writer of the source article instinctively concludes, there is a danger there could be too few humans.