There's no sense in quibbling over a vague and imprecise summary of the concept. Legally, fraud requires an injured party. In our scenario here, nobody was injured, so no fraud. Whether temporarily possessing a document to hand it to its intended recipient counts as "obtaining" is not really the pertinent question.
I suspect it may fall afoul of a law about making false statements to the government, but that's distinct from fraud.
That's obviously nonsense. Lying on a loan application is fraud, even if you don't get the loan. You're confusing criminal liability with civil liability, which does require damages.
It sounds like you get that LLMs are just "next word" predictors. So the piece you may be missing is simply that behind the scenes, your prompt gets "rephrased" in a way that makes generating the response a simple matter of predicting the next word repeatedly. So it's not necessary for the LLM to "understand" your prompt the way you're imagining, this is just an illusion caused by extremely good next-word prediction.
If it hypothetically was a crime, I wonder how often it would actually get prosecuted given someone used their real ID, showing the office failed to check anything other than a name known to have dupes, and/or given they had no intent to steal something and acted with knowledge and permission of the intended recipient, showing no malicious intent. I can imagine reasons those wouldn’t be considered a valid defense, but I guess it probably depends on what office & document & law we’re talking about.
As a counter example, I always decrease the font-size everywhere. The annoying trend of bloating everything with whitespace, means that less and less stuff fits on the screen. But even HN is on 80% right now.
It far and away beats the alternative which is clicking on a link and nothing happening. Feedback should be within a frame or two of latency, not seconds...
I suspect it may fall afoul of a law about making false statements to the government, but that's distinct from fraud.