They compare the system to a letter with a secure tracking device that gets sent continuously between different post offices and is never delivered. It would be hard for a thief to find it, but when you need it again you simply activate the tracking device, and it can then be easily located.
The "never delivered" part is the key part of the analogy that they've left unaddressed here. They seem to think that packets can somehow exist in the space between nodes, which makes no God-damned sense, and sounds like the topic of a really awful sci-fi novel. The analogy is also bullshit anyway, because the letter is whole and not in several pieces. To use their analogy, this is like saying that your mail is safer ripped apart in 8 pieces sitting in 8 separate mail trucks which are continuously driving around the United States. Which is perhaps true, but if a single one of those trucks don't make it, you can't make use of the letter (let's say the letter is a legally binding contract that needs to have all of its pieces to make the analogy complete) not to mention your speed on getting that letter is now only as fast as the slowest truck.
Also, your supposedly more-secure security system is now only as secure as the server hosting the keys which tell you where all the packets are, which would amount to the same problem. But who knows? Maybe they have some ingenious way of solving that problem. I'm not going to pay to find out.