From the link you provided:
The author cites historical accounts of the plague proportions of this insect, frequently lasting for years on end, notes the organized manner by which they were harvested (involving large numbers of people), and concludes that it provided huge returns for the labor invested.
It seems that when the insect reached plague proportions, an organized manner of harvesting (mass capturing) evolved, thereby making their capture nutrients positive. I wonder whether agriculture is necessary for insects to reach plague proportions, though.
...crickets were not an ephemeral resource taken on an "encounter basis." The crickets probably constituted a formal part of the seasonal round,...
So they were seasonal fare for the Great Basin Indians.
Several investigators have concluded that the pandora moth provided a significantly greater nutrient return for effort expended than did plant resources.
Apparently some insects can provide positive nutrient returns.
My thoughts so far based on this discussion: ok, it is possible that some insects under some special conditions could be profitably eaten by humans. Would that mean that they should be considered an integral part of a paleo diet? I personally believe that no, as I fail to see why humans would choose them over bigger animals. A case could be made for insects vs. plants under certain circumstances, but that does not mean I will be adding them to my diet any time soon.