Let's look at this (non-)issue in a broader sense. What was the point of
applying the adjective "active" to particular devices?

"Obviously", it was to distinguish them from non-active devices. And prior to
the Audion, there /were/ no active devices -- devices that /amplified/.

Several years ago we had an insane argument, in which a significant number of
posters claimed that transducers were amplifiers, twisting the definitions of
these terms into perverse forms.

We are now told that a PIN diode -- which is no more than a switch -- is an
active device, apparently because it's made of semiconductor material, which
/just happens/ to be used in active devices. So -- duh -- they must both be
active devices.

What does the material have to do with it? A switch is a switch. Switches are
not, and have never been, considered active devices. Do PIN diodes get a
special break, just because they're semiconductors? Are we now supposed to
classify the power switch on a table radio as an active device?

Calling an electrical generator an active device is meaningless, because it
doesn't draw any useful distinction with "inactive" devices (such as a rake or
a step ladder). An if an electrical generator is an "active" device, why isn't
a log? A log can be burned to produce energy.

Human beings are incredibly stupid. They believe what their parents tell them,
and almost always stick ferociously to their childhood beliefs throughout
life. They believe that whatever pops into their heads is true, and these
beliefs can only rarely be shaken. Worst of all, humans hardly ever ask "How
do I know whether something is true or not?" Of course, in a democracy it
doesn't matter. One person's point of view is as good as any other person's.