Google can still automatically mark your message as spam if enough people mark it as such or you trigger spam identification too often (this can happen if you send frequent test emails with not much in them) - it’s not neccesarily an attack on you. But plenty of spammers will send perfectly well verified emails today, so you are just caught in the crossfire.

Try sending a gmail account you still have access to a couple of genuine looking mails (eg. At least a paragraph of legible text and with a signature), then marking the messages as not spam. That worked for me. Even after that though, one line messages can still trigger the spam detection.

I think you’re misunderstanding them. They specifically mentioned SEO recipe sites, which are websites dedicated to being ranked highest on search engines, which typically means they don’t correlate with recipe quality, but with clickability (or whatever the algorithms like today). There’s a lot of them, so calling them spam isn’t necessarily wrong. Lots of people search for recipes, so it’s bound to attract it.

They just seem to be cautioning that the LLM might pull from bogus sources since there’s not really a straightforward benchmark for a good recipe that it might reference, and that you have to remember you’re using a tool. Your own intelligence is the real test. Which isn’t bad advice when dealing with AI output, but I think you already got that. I would say, don’t be baited into the idea that everyone is some hardcore AI hater because they are skeptical, there are certainly some, but assuming it alienates the many people that have surprisingly nuanced takes.

I hear this more frequently nowadays, but it really is kind of misplacing the blame for this change. Steam went for this model precisely because many of the bigger game companies to this day refuse to sell their games as anything but a heavily restricted license. And Steam as a storefront does have to cater to them in that regard, especially back then. Even physical disks as others pointed out were technically not something you owned, but rather that resale and such was not enforced or enforceable. (You would definitely get some stern letters if you started copying and selling those games at larger scale, even if you ‘owned’ the original copy).

People do still sell DRM free games on Steam that you can copy and distribute to essentially your hearts extent without Steam ever getting involved. The license you have is for Steam to provide you the download service so you can get your digital copy (and a bit more). If you care about people owning games, then it’s up to you to support and buy from the kinds of companies that don’t provide you a license or (more likely) where the license is unrestricted enough to fit your description of ownership. The middleman like Steam you buy it from shouldn’t matter if they don’t exert undue control beyond that. And at least being on PC if you really must buy something with DRM you have options to remove it.