Having said that, I will join you in this fight.

See also: exponentially.

I suspect some people are literally having conniption fits about this…

You can’t take a descriptive dictionary and then claim it is prescriptive.

IIRC both the OED and CED list figurative uses for the word, do you know any publications considered more authoritative than those for English? Webster too, for those who prefer simplified English.

The Académie do publish a dictionary every few decades though, there was a new edition recently, so there is a prescriptive dictionary for French even though it carries little weight in reality.

French is the only living language to attempt it to this extent, though the existence of one is enough to make my “there are none for living languages” point incorrect. It is difficult to pin a language down until no one really speaks it day-to-day (so it doesn't evolve at the rates commonly used languages do).

I'm not sure what would even make a dictionary prescriptive other than an explicit declaration that it is so or, ridiculously, a law declaring the same.

there are no 100% correct descriptive dictionaries. Any prescriptive dictionary is automatically correct.

… in the view of their compilers.

I could write a prescriptive dictionary far more easily than I could get others to accept it as correct.

Yes you would have to be involved with a regulatory institution first

The "literally" ship sailed centuries ago. Sorry, but that battle has been lost. Even so-called "prescriptive" dictionaries would be categorically incorrect if they ignore nearly three centuries of common vernacular.