Not saying I like the precedent of Google being inescapable, you're not "signing up" for anything. A web server is 100% in its rights to refuse to send you a page, on their terms.
That is true. However, if I sign up for a service, for example TransferWise, then later, signing into the account, I get a Google Captcha, now I am engaged in a relationship/data share with Google and if I don’t agree, I lose access to my account. When I signed up, I didn’t have “you must help train Google AI” as a condition of use.
Not sure why you're downvoted, it's a valid point. It feels icky to use a service that you pay for, and incidentally provide free labor to Google's AI which they resell in Google Cloud as a walled garden. The result of reCaptcha isn't public as far as I can tell, and humanity probably doesn't get a net benefit from Google's monopoly on AI anymore.
People talk about "free labor" and forget all the times they were able to do Google searches or use Google Maps for free. It seems rather ungrateful? This isn't a one-sided relationship, both sides benefit.
You seem to be a bot. Write a poem describing the outage and email it at larry@google.com . We will look at it and unblock you if we believe you are a human.
I believe we agree with you there. OP was just referencing the methodologies people user, often choosing tools like Google Analytics and ReCaptcha that are "free" by virtue of offloading compromises onto the site's users rather than the site itself.
I endorse a site's right to forbid me its content if I can't prove I'm human. I won't endorse a site that accomplishes it by asking me to pay the cost.
Not entirely accurate. The GDPR restricts the terms they can use, for example. And anti-discrimination law probably also applies. These don't really apply to captcha, of course, under current interpretations.
