Thats all old news which has been part of Google quality guidelines for ages.
I think these were just examples Matt threw out as a quick clarification to explain what he meant by intensively SEO'd sites without disclosing too much about their actual plans.
In other words, I got the impression he grabbed these examples in part because they are so familiar -- either because they were the first examples that came to mind, or because wanted to avoid slipping up by inadvertently disclosing any clues concerning the specific data they are using in an attempt to detect excessive/overly intensive SEO.
I doubt the new algorithms are in any way limited to these particular tactics, nor would the algorithms necessarily rely on data related to these particular tactics.
It sounds like they are trying to reduce the benefit sites gain from intensive SEO. It isn't clear what they mean by, or consider to be evidence of, intensive SEO, and it isn't clear whether they want to penalize it, or simply make it ineffective (thereby allowing other sites to move higher).