The non-JS challenge[0] mentioned in the blog post is one based on HTTP meta refresh. The (hypothetical) WebAssembly challenge is proposed as an improvement on the existing JS proof-of-work challenge[1].
Yes but without JS (or wasm), the meta refresh option can't actually do any work, right?
I mean, parsing a meta refresh tag is not exactly rocket science... aren't most scrapers already headless browsers anyway? I know I have seen several big proxy providers offering that as a service to defeat cloudflare.
Are they locked into github (using their proprietary APIs) or just using it as a git backend (using standard git tooling)? It's not clear from the article.
Yes, Lucasfilm actually owns several trademarks on the word droid, mainly in toys, computer games, and entertainment. Interpreted broadly, these trademarks cover "smart" devices, which are generally used to interact with entertainment media.
See also the legal battle of Apple v Apple[0] (music vs computers)
They're not "being weird about it." It's explicitly not "a Linux distro" because they intend for the kernel to be just another freely interchangeable component (as is mentioned), although I suppose there might be some residual bitterness from their work constantly being called "Linux" or "a Linux distribution" as well.
This isn't unique to Guix System, either. Debian[0] refers to itself as "a free operating system (OS) for your computer" and doesn't even mention the term Linux on its home page, until you go to the about page[1], where it is mentioned (three paragraphs in!) that "Debian systems currently use the Linux kernel or the FreeBSD kernel." The term "distribution" doesn't even appear until the very end, where it is mentioned that "Debian was begun in August 1993 by Ian Murdock, as a new distribution which would be made openly, in the spirit of Linux and GNU."
Maybe, since the term "GNU distribution" is rather unorthodox, Guix System should just market itself as a free operating system, as Debian does.
> using proprietary software make you a bad person
We don't believe this. We argue that free software is important[0] because it gives users control over their technology, and proprietary software is bad because it denies users that control. We don't believe using proprietary software (whether by choice or otherwise) makes you a bad person.
If anyone is actually making this argument I would say they are doing the free software movement a disservice.
reply