Well, okay, you can select two specific words to fuel your apparent outrage if you'd like, but if you actually read the entire sentence, you'll see that there is some critical context that you're missing: "you have to physically touch it to activate it in the same way that you'd have to touch the Touch ID sensor."

I did not claim that it was the same security scheme or that it's biometric or anything like that. I did claim that you have to physically touch it to activate it.

Edit to add:

re 'Yubikey Nano is a "thing you have", TouchID is a "thing you are".', I would argue that your finger is in fact a thing you have. The loss of a finger might change a little of who you are depending on the circumstances that led to you losing said finger, but these both fall into "thing you have" territory for me. I don't think it's wise to consider Touch ID much more than that, personally.