If we look at only the Blender Development Fund, the list of the corporate patrons include Meta, Google, Nvidia and even Adobe. In general, this is the situation for a lot of FOSS projects. If Anthropic as a Blender patron is bad news, then things were never good in the first place.
In my opinion, whether it’s good or bad, it is a compromise that we rely on.
The user does decide, XDG user directories are optional and configurable. Since they are already established, user-friendly distros / desktop environments already pre-install them.
And what speaks against just using a new directory within your home directory as your “specific place that is user owned that isn’t filed with cruft and configuration files”?
They clearly meant the cumulative age when two of the four children are holding the controllers together (must be a new Gen Alpha & Beta activity). The youngest child is 2 years old, the twins are 3 years old and the big boss is already 5 years old. There is no other reasonable way to interpret this.
Websites that let me scroll down and up without any annoying animated hindrance have my thanks.
In general there is the [email protected] community.
Did you hear him say “I’m in”?
This is one of the funniest LinkedIn Lunatics post, but as I’m looking up the “hype” around OpenClaw, I feel overwhelmed. Did mankind really make a gigantic leap forward towards the dead internet in such a short time?
Could you elaborate how the configuration might not be respected? Do you mean that you’ve often encountered applications that save files to hard-coded paths and do not even let you change the destination path?
If you ask me, that’s just bad software design. If the software is open-source, there is the option to request the developers to read the actual path of the respective well know directory from the XDG environment variables or allow configuration.