It ain’t only corporations, it’s casual, intuitive, everyday speakers—the community that owns the language—arriving there naturally from the regular meaning of individual words: They see a work that appears to be created by some form of intelligence/creativity. No natural intelligence created it. Hence, a work of artificial intelligence.
See? Not that hard. No need to be difficult about it. Nitpicking a casual speaker over it is bound to earn you well-deserved disdain.
Not disagreeing that they’re probably just inconsistent.
Is it possible to be consistent about moral relativism & still make firm choices?
What’s it called when morality is construed as systems of arbitrarily chosen axioms & moral judgements amount to judges stating whether something agrees with a system they chose? Is it inconsistent to acknowledge that these axioms are ultimately choices, choose a system, and judge all actions eligible for moral consideration according to that chosen system?
Nah, any decent password manager or security application can manage multi-factor security credentials of any kind without lock-out due to phone loss.
Password authentication is beyond primitive by offering too many avenues of attack: the full secret is transmitted & shared. Passkeys, client certificates, OTP don’t transmit the secret key. Passkeys & client certificates authentication never share a secret key, so the server can’t expose it.
it must be a bunch of dorks that pronounce it wrong just because, right?
Yep: I often see people try to “correct” learners at bootcamps pronouncing it Jason. The fact people pronounce it Jason until told otherwise tells us which is more natural. The “correction”, in contrast, is a myth that must be learned.
Acknowledging something happens doesn’t endorse it, and Crawford never endorsed your pronunciation as natural. As I suggested earlier, he said “I strictly don’t care”. Jason is a completely reasonable & natural pronunciation.
There’s the original pronunciation, the suggestive spelling, the common phenomenon of punning in programming, and the natural way people pronounce it as a familiar name when they first see it. Then there’s your camp with a mythical, dorky pronunciation they pull out of nowhere and reinforce because.
I think people are fine to call it Jason & drive you irrationally mad.
You seem in irrational need for validation of your pronunciation despite clear justification against it. Cool ad populum. Fly that insecurity flag high.
You & your buddies can keep pronouncing it jaysawn & sounding like complete dorks if it makes you feel better. However, it was clearly intended to be pronounced naturally as Jason like its inventor pronounces it.
Believing otherwise is almost as bad as the plebs who think the symbol ∅ is inspired by Greek letter φ instead of Scandinavian letter Ø.
No, it’s pronounced Jason. Douglas Crockford was just too laissez-faire to correct anyone on it probably because he didn’t give a fuck.
Elisp has a nice notation for maintainably composing regexes like any other programming expression.
Only language I’ve seen offer that.
So instead of "/\\*\\(?:[^*]\\|\\*[^/]\\)*\\*+/", the regular expression to match C block comments could be expressed (with inline comments)
(rx "/*" ; Initial /*
(zero-or-more
(or (not (any "*")) ; Either non-*,
(seq "*" ; or * followed by
(not (any "/"))))) ; non-/
(one-or-more "*") ; At least one star,
"/") ; and the final /
Right: that’s the right order.
Do web searches care about word order, though?