I agree it’s debatable, whether Hyperoptic is FTTP. My understanding, which may be wrong, is that there are multiple individual “premises” in a block of flats, ie each dwelling. Wikipedia suggests existence another acronym, FTTB (building), which would at least distinguish it from FTTP and FTTC.
The other thing is... the arstechnica article suggests the occupants of the flats, whilst having access to 1Gbps fibre, actually have to share it. If there are (say) 30 flats, and each one settles down to stream a 4K movie at the same time, they’re only getting 33Mbps each - barely adequate. If some flats contain multiple kids, streaming multiple movies, it gets worse, and maybe even inadequate.
That’s then another scenario whereby Mr & Mrs Bloggs living in these flats are subsequently offered 1Gbps true FTTP from Openreach, but turn it down as they already have 1Gbps fibre from Hyperoptic, unaware they might be missing the opportunity for a massive improvement.
But by any sensible definition it is a form of fibre broadband and a useful contribution to society, and imho, they should be allowed to market it as “fibre”, even if Mr & Mrs Bloggs fail to understand it all.
Likewise, I do understand the arguments against fake fibre too, and the resentment that FTTC is marketed as fibre. I am after all in a minority of 1 in these threads, and I have to face up to that.