Literally the next two sentences describe eye tracking.

> The computer is going to notice all this. It approves of rereading.

I took that to be referencing the occasional page ups in the document he was describing

Not as a new mechanism of tracking, via eye tracking

Could be wrong.

I think it would have been slightly more valid if they were independent, yes.

Well, the AIs are supposed to find and fix the bugs too. So now what's our excuse?

Speaker: "XYZ is revolutionary!"

HN: "That is a very neutral statement about XYZ."

Ok dude.

Interesting, I hadn't considered the bigot angle.

Two things can be true.

An Iranian citizen probably ran out of toothpaste this morning and was angry about that.

So now, in your view, that mean "three things are true here" ?

NO.

Because some things, like state murder, so much more important than other things, like internet access and toothpaste, that it is sheer incompetence to put one in a headline and ignore the other.

You can find contrary advice for any given topic, all upvoted highly, if you look for it.

If we want people to feel safe talking about suicidal thoughts, we need to rework the involuntary commitment laws. As it is now, a person has every reason to be fearful about opening up. You can be imprisoned, humiliated, and medicated against your will, all without due process of law, just because you were careless with your words.

Murderers who are declared insane by a court aren't even involuntary committed for lengthy periods of time.

There is no country in the world where the ultra wealthy don't weild influence over the government.

Cigarettes are usually sold at an increased tax rate already.