I mean she pretty much explains the whole process of getting it. If you're willing to get prosecuted just go get it yourself.

"They" has been used as a singular pronoun as far back as the late 1300s, but for the case where you didn't know the gender of the person or the gender was not relevant. Using it for someone whose gender is gender is known but is not male or female is much newer.

Here's an article with details [1].

The problem of what pronoun to use for someone who is neither male or female is not new, of course. That article says:

> There have always been people who didn’t conform to an expected gender expression, or who seemed to be neither male nor female. But we’ve struggled to find the right language to describe these people—and in particular, the right pronouns. In the 17th century, English laws concerning inheritance sometimes referred to people who didn’t fit a gender binary using the pronoun it, which, while dehumanizing, was conceived of as being the most grammatically fit answer to gendered pronouns around then

[1] https://www.merriam-webster.com/words-at-play/singular-nonbi...

Good to see that; thanks for digging deeper. I hope he has done this behind the scenes and the holes are patched, because I'm sure that by now, someone with worse intent has already followed those footsteps...

>>demonstrate they will use it responsibly.

The problem is to define "demonstrate" and the criteria. Remember the gatekeeper is now an unemployed gal who "know lot's of things about cyber security" according to her main page. Seems likely a competent bad actor could easily impersonate a well-meaning reporter...

Yes, security through obscurity isn't security, but this also seems incredibly irresponsible for any "security researcher". AFAIK, just basic standard good practice is to report the flaws and allow a reasonable interval before publishing, and there seems to be no hint of this.

Modern society really is held together with duct tape, baling twine, and a few pieces of bubble gum...

[EDIT: pronouns]

I wonder which no-fly list it is. Is it a government no-fly list that would contain suspected international criminals and terrorists, or an airline's private no-fly list that would contain people who cause a ruckus on flights, drunks, anti-maskers, and so on. Maybe one shared between airlines? I would imagine that second list has grown substantially since 2020 given all the craziness airlines have had to deal with since then.

I’m curious to learn: if “they” is being added to style guides as a way to refer to a singular human without implying any gender, is “it” the same or is there a somewhat different meaning behind the usage?