That's not really addressing the point, is it. IQ correlates well with measures of performance. Taleb's point, if we are to generously interpret his screed, is that some classes of valuable mental performance are very hard to generate metrics for or even define at all, and therefore, you would expect them to correlate with IQ less or not at all.
For instance the chart that claims IQ correlates well with military performance and poorly with "creativity". But how is creativity being measured? It's going to be far easier to measure the performance of a soldier than a creative person, the latter isn't even a clearly defined category, lots of people consider themselves to be creative but generate unpopular dirge. So all he's doing here is dissing people whose performance is more easily measured by nature of their job.
I have to admit the article annoyed me. I actually did believe him when he said IQ doesn't correlate at the upper reaches - I have even studied psychology but it was a long time ago, and wondered if my knowledge was just out of date or forgotten. So I'm glad I read these comments and learned that it's not the case. But it mostly annoyed me because I thought it would be an interesting addition to the ongoing story around poor replication rates and practices in some branches of science. But it seems actually to be some sort of political article targeting conservatives. Even with the wrong parts of his article, I do agree with some of his overall points, but when I got to the end and saw it was tagged "Racism" and "Alt-Right" rather than science related terms, I realised I'd been reading a bog standard rant of the sort that might appear in the Guardian or Vice - just dressed up in a scientific and haughty tone, to make it sound authoritative.
The problem with his overall point is that whilst yes, an observer of history might have wondered how Britain went from primitive tribes conquered by the Romans, at the outskirts of known civilisation, to owner of the largest empire the world has ever seen, that was over a very time long period and the average Roman person would have been quite right to stereotype the population of the north at that time - the changes that invalidated those stereotypes took place over far longer than a human lifetime. People using IQ scores to measure certain types of performance today would be entirely valid to do despite the correlation with race, if they were looking for workers whose performance does correlate with IQ. The fact that not all categories of valuable work may be measurable or correlate doesn't detract from that fact.