Of course it's not the same, that doesn't mean it's not flawed, they have millions of unemployed people living in essentially homeless conditions with no hope for a future, that's Basic Assistance, you live but you never truly live.

UBI follows the idea that economy alone will sustain a population, but the problem is the trials which have occurred led to people mostly indulging in social activities, not pursuing enterprise like so many people argue, great for emotion, really bad for economy, that kind of thing snowballs into skills shortages, workforce shortages and resource shortages, when no one wants to dig in the mud anymore, or pick up your garbage, coz they can just choose to do whatever and if they need more money then they can consider doing something other than painting, singing, dancing and playing games.

Both systems are unsustainable, Basic Assistance leads to extremely poor quality of life for many, UBI leads to economic collapse, either way they both are flawed. :)

Whether the creators said they're different isn't really a big problem when you weigh up the functionality of them, they can have different names, involve different systems but both appear to be very flawed ideas, Finlands trial highlights that UBI is just a feelgood measure and did not stimulate employment growth which directly supports the economy which pays for the system.