@quid, given that the problematic article argues that ZFC is inconsistent and I argue no such thing, I find your comment surprising.

@MikhailKatz Allow me to quote someone with whom you might agree sometimes:

"Jaykov Foukzon just published a provocative-looking article. Here he is not arguing that ZFC is inconsistent. That would be old hat :-) Rather, he argues that "ZFC plus the assumption of the existence of (what he refers to as) a standard model of ZFC" is inconsistent. Is this going anywhere?"

Maybe you don't recognize this, so let me remind you. It is your now-deleted question from MathOverflow.

So is the "problematic article" arguing for ZFC to be inconsistent, or ZFC+There is a standard model?

@user170039 If you Google part of Asaf's text, some version of the question is still visible in Google Cache.

The whole text of the version I see in the Google Cache - including links - is:

Jaykov Foukzon just published a provocative-looking article. Here he is not arguing that ZFC is inconsistent. That would be old hat :-) Rather, he argues that "ZFC plus the assumption of the existence of (what he refers to as) a standard model of ZFC" is inconsistent. Is this going anywhere?

@DanielFischer As already mentioned in another room, for several users your absence was quite noticeable:

@MikhailKatz so you claim that you asking the question is completely independent of the existence of that article? You just happened to have asked that question on MO a few days ago. And now you just happened to have asked this question here with there being no underlying connection at all. Alright.