The article rests on the notion that this is confusing, but fails to prove it:

  int x = 0, y = 1, z = 0;
  int r = (x & y) == z; // 1
  int s = x & (y == z); // 0
  int t = x & y == z;   // 0

None of that surprises me, but moreover I would never expect myself or anyone else to be sure about it, I would refer to the operator table to be check. The article also supposes that this line has some natural meaning that everyone expects, but I'm not seeing it:

  if(x() & a() == y)

I think the author is projecting their own cognitive patterns onto the rest of us without justification.