[jug]

It does, and I enjoy mp4 videos and I'm not bothered much by DRM on Netflix either, but should a component like NaCl implying a binary blob be part of an open source software.. by default? Feels weird to have it included with Chromium by default. Weren't Chrome and Chromium originally separated in order to make one compatible with open source distributions, so that this sort of thing would be avoided? A conflict with Debian sounds like a pretty big one.

[strcat]

NaCl doesn't imply proprietary any more than a JavaScript engine does. The downloaded code is bytecode at an abstraction level a bit below C but quite a bit above assembly. It's not substantially different from a freedom perspective than code compiled to asm.js or just minified JavaScript. Both are usually proprietary and require reverse engineering work to decipher.

[vezzy-fnord]

As it's not the "preferred form of the work", I think it is proprietary - same way any object/intermediate or obfuscated code would be.

[rockdoe]

>NaCl doesn't imply proprietary any more than a JavaScript engine does

http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/javascript-trap.html

[diamondlovesyou]

> The downloaded code is bytecode at an abstraction level a bit below C but quite a bit above assembly.

You just described PNaCl, not NaCl. NaCl is architecture specific and already sandboxed (ie the SFI part of NaCl), whereas PNaCl is not.