The usage of "free" is almost always used when referring to something that can be obtained/used without exchanging money.
Google is not requiring you to pay for an account. Even if they were, you could still complain that this is not "free without an active internet subscription", or "free without owning a device that can connect to the internet", or "free without taking up 5 minutes of my time".
It's like saying an apple someone gives you is not "free" but "free with the condition of using your muscles to pick up the apple". While technically true it's not something anyone would reasonably expect to be labeled that way.
The page wants access to your name, email, language settings and profile picture. Language setting and profile picture aside, you would need to surrender that information anyway for billing purposes.
It should read "free with google account, electricity, computer and/or all other equipment needed to interface with a website, and last but not least, the user's time."
Contrary to the downvotes on the above comment I see absolutely zero issue with wanting to be informed of this in advance. I would've made this exact same comment if I had run into it myself.
It clearly says "Sign up with Google" before you're prompted with anything. Saying it on the landing page itself as an asterisk next to "free" would just feel stupid, like those overly cautious warning labels, and if anything make me think less of the service.
So where do you draw the line? Maybe it even needs to be included in the post submission title? It's just ridiculous. Anyone thinking this is a problem needs to get their priorities straight.
> So where do you draw the line? Maybe it even needs to be included in the post submission title? It's just ridiculous. Anyone thinking this is a problem needs to get their priorities straight.
...
I have the same thing for articles where I click on the submission title and there's a paywall. I want to know about the wall before I get there so that I'll know it's not worth the effort. Usually this is achieved by looking in the comments for an archive link so in that case I don't care about there not being a warning in the submission title because the comments allow me to enjoy the content anyway. In this case there's no need for a warning in the submission title because I go to the website and I get a neat idea, that's fine, no wall yet. There's a button to try it and that's where the warning should be that a Google account is required. Your argument is what's ridiculous.
Once I click the button I've already decided. If I am surprised by something after I click that would have impacted my decision to click it in the first place, I get very upset for being tricked like that.
As an example: I recently bought a piece of software for my new Mac that I had good experience with some years ago, only to find that it's not compatible with the newer models. Upon contacting support about it, this is a known issue with a whole support article written about it. However, it wasn't mentioned anywhere on the landing page or buy pages. They're working on a beta that will warn you (still after you've already installed the software) if it's not compatible with your machine, but again... if I had known this I would not have purchased in the first place. I feel tricked, and upset. This is the same type of feeling.
