It does matter, because that Google integration didn’t happen by magic. Whatever the site is, they chose to do things that way.
The only way Google stops things like this is if they get actual pushback, and the only realistic way to achieve that is to make the people using their service reconsider.
and the only realistic way to achieve that is to make the people using their service reconsider.
So what exactly will naming the site achieve? If someone wants to boycott recaptcha (which I’m 100% onboard with, btw) they’ll just not comply with the captcha and leave the site when they encounter it. On the other hand, someone who would not otherwise visit the site cannot reduce traffic to the site by direct action. Telling their friends “don’t use that site, it uses recaptcha” is no more effective than telling them “don’t use any site that requires you to do QR recaptchas.”
It does matter, because that Google integration didn’t happen by magic. Whatever the site is, they chose to do things that way.
The only way Google stops things like this is if they get actual pushback, and the only realistic way to achieve that is to make the people using their service reconsider.
So what exactly will naming the site achieve? If someone wants to boycott recaptcha (which I’m 100% onboard with, btw) they’ll just not comply with the captcha and leave the site when they encounter it. On the other hand, someone who would not otherwise visit the site cannot reduce traffic to the site by direct action. Telling their friends “don’t use that site, it uses recaptcha” is no more effective than telling them “don’t use any site that requires you to do QR recaptchas.”
Exactly this!