Of course Nvidia changed their minds, at least for now in the meagre sample count of games we have with it, that much is a fact, it's obviously impossible to counter and neither did I do that. In fact, that is what I said and what apparently startled someone to say that the press (TR, Tom's and PCPer) was wrong when they initially reported on it. The problem is that the press wasn't wrong because that's what Nvidia said in no uncertain terms.
Contrary to what you say, there is nothing ambiguous in the Turing whitepaper about their intentions, they described in very clear terms how the system was going to work:
What exactly in the paragraph above leaves space for ambiguity? Of course Nvidia can do whatever it wants next, but their intentions were very clear, but apparently someone is trying to rewrite history by conflating what their written intentions were with what they are doing [for] now and accuse me of serious things along the way. And Tom's specifically confirmed with them back then too. Are we going to dispute that too? How unambiguous do things have to be? Have Jensen say it out loud on stage in pure 8K resolution so you can read the fine detail in his lips too if you wish?