Your individual politics don't matter here, it is a technology article that happens to use a pronoun for an unknown entity which is entirely acceptable in common parlance. No one is clamoring that he/him is unacceptable, but to disparage people for their choice of expression in writing feels awfully similar to what the anti-woke crowd claim the woke do.
Additionally, plenty of languages use non-gendered pronouns.
"My bank denied my loan application again, I can't believe them!" - Correct - Unknown, amorphous entity, regardless if the rejection was specifically caused by a man or woman or otherwise.
"temp8964 replied to me on HN again, she's quite persistent." - Incorrect - Without knowing who you are, is it still acceptable for me to blindly assert that you must be a woman and doing otherwise is wrong?
However, if we assume that Satoshi is a singular person, how do you suggest we refer to pseudonymous individuals whose gender and identity are unknown? Again, is it acceptable that I insist on referring to you as she/her without knowing who you are?
Assuming that it is the chosen, gendered name-on-the-internet that matters, if I were born biologically male but then undergo a sex change procedure and then and adopt a feminine name like Jane Smith in my work, would it be acceptable in your eyes to refer to me as she/her by default? Surely in this case, he/him or they/them would be unacceptable, if I follow your logic correctly.
I still would love to hear how you think people should refer to you, especially if you have not asserted your own pronouns. It seems, in reference to you, this is a classic, centuries-old case of singular 'they' being perfectly acceptable.
Also, see the HN guidelines.
In this case, Satoshi is a Japanese male name. If you have evidence to suggest otherwise, there is no reason to pretend you don't know the gender.
However, in an article in which you speculate about the real identity behind a pseudonym, suggesting any possible gender or plurality, you should use /they/, this being the whole point of what your doing.
https://public.oed.com/blog/a-brief-history-of-singular-they...
>The only harm happening here is people like you overstepping bounds and ultimately trashing actually correct usage of the language because you are operating under some pretext that there's a woke conspiracy to remove all gendered pronouns from colloquial usage.
So it seems like you agree with me. The sensitivity and derision of the (more or less) correct usage of a pronoun indicates culture war malarky here.
It's unfortunate that so many other people here fail to grasp the harm that this is doing to written and spoken English.
Satoshi is a masculine name, so it's reasonable to expect the author to use masculine singular pronouns. Even if Satoshi is a woman or a group of people, we can still refer to the pseudonym construct as 'he' because the construct is masculine.
It's needlessly confusing to use the singular 'they' in reference to a specific individual with a gendered name, especially when the whole point of the article is that Satoshi is this one man. And most other writing I find on Satoshi refers to him as a 'he' without a problem.
You incessantly continue to miss the point. People have explained multiple times that this isn't about political correctness. You are seriously missing the point.
It doesn't matter what you think about whether it's politically correct or not to assume Satoshi's gender. And it doesn't matter what I think either. And it doesn't matter whether either of us even give a shit.
What matters is that it is objectively correct, colloquial, and precise to wield the singular `they` when discussing an unknown person. It doesn't matter whether they've picked Mary or Satoshi as their pseudonymous handle.
> we can still refer to the pseudonym construct as 'he' because the construct is masculine.
I'd love to be introduced to a group or style guide that has adopted this style. I have never encountered it. The closest I've encountered is just a default "use he/him because most people just assume male without really thinking about it when online". I would never, as a pedant, use a masculine pronoun to describe e.g. a forum user of unknown meatspace characteristics irrespective of the gender of their handle unless there was a pretext of role playing. If I'm Jisoo on waffles.fm I don't expect to be referred to as "she".
Even if you're correct (and I think you are) that it can be considered correct to use a gendered pronoun when a pseudonym is clearly masculine or feminine and you're strictly referring to the pseudonym, the author of the essay is simply making a style choice and I'm perplexed how you consider his correct usage of the english language (as it's been used since the 14th century) to be ruining the english language. EDIT: also I actually think the author is not referring to the "pseudonym construct" in the essay, I think the author is deliberately referring to the unknown entity that goes by satoshi rather than satoshi full stop (but I may be wrong).
Now if the author said something along the lines of "Satoshi and I's shared understanding of the cypherpunk ... ... " I'd pull out the pitchfork immediately.
Satoshi is a he, and should be referred to as a he, not a they.
Satoshi Nakamoto invented bitcoin. He’s a legend.
I wonder who is behind the legend of Satoshi. Will we ever figure out who they are?