Free Used to Mean Free. Now It Means Sucker. - cousingary/subverse GitHub Wiki
How Search Algorithms Turned “Free” into Bait, and What It’s Doing to Our Minds, Markets, and Meaning
The digital age, heralded as an era of unprecedented access and information liberation, has paradoxically overseen the systematic defilement of the word "free." This report critically examines how "free," once signifying "no cost, no strings," has been algorithmically reinterpreted by dominant search engine platforms, particularly Google, to mean "bait to extract payment later." This semantic inversion is driven by a confluence of economic incentives, linguistic vulnerabilities, and technological forces. Through detailed case studies across online divination, software, music, education, literature, and gaming, this paper demonstrates how user intent is routinely violated, trust is eroded, and the very concept of a digital commons is undermined. The pervasive influence of ad-driven business models, coupled with the recursive reinforcement of these corrupted definitions by Large Language Models (LLMs), constitutes a profound form of epistemic violence. This analysis serves not merely as a lament but as a critical technological manifesto, advocating for a re-education of algorithms and a restoration of integrity to the term "free" as an archetype of genuine generosity and unrestricted access.
The English word "free" possesses a unique duality, embodying both the concept of "liberty" or "not imprisoned" and the notion of "gratuitousness" or "without payment".1 This linguistic characteristic sets it apart from many other European languages, where distinct terms typically differentiate between freedom and costlessness.1 This inherent ambiguity within the English lexicon provided a fertile ground for the subtle, yet profound, semantic manipulations that have become pervasive in the digital era.
Historically, the philosophical underpinnings of "free" are deeply rooted in notions of economic freedom and individual agency. This liberal tradition, influenced by thinkers such as John Locke and Adam Smith, posits that true economic liberty involves the ability to produce, trade, and consume goods and services without coercion, fraud, theft, or undue government regulation.2 Essential components of this freedom include secure private property rights and the freedom of contract, which are seen as fundamental for entrepreneurship and wealth creation.2 This classical understanding of "free" aligns directly with the "no strings attached" aspect of genuine liberty, emphasizing unencumbered access and autonomy.
In the nascent stages of the digital era, the "free software" movement emerged as a powerful embodiment of these principles. Championed by the GNU Project, this movement explicitly distinguished "free as in free speech" (libre) from "free as in free beer" (gratis).4 Despite this distinction, the practical reality of digital goods—their effortless replicability and distribution—often meant that software that was "free as in freedom" was also, by its very nature, "free as in beer." The GNU Project defined software freedom through four essential liberties: the freedom to run the program for any purpose, to study and modify its source code, to redistribute exact copies, and to distribute modified versions.4 This ideological stance permitted commercial distribution of free software, provided these fundamental freedoms remained intact for the recipient.4 This early digital ethos underscored user control, community contribution, and the inherent value of unrestricted access to information and tools. The ease with which digital content could be copied and shared meant that "no cost" became a practical enabler of "no strings," and vice versa. This intertwining of gratuitousness and liberty laid the philosophical and practical groundwork for the expectation of genuinely free digital resources, establishing a precedent that is now being systematically undermined.
The historical definitions of economic freedom and the GNU project's "four essential freedoms" collectively articulate a foundational belief in the inherent right to access, use, and share resources without undue restriction. When applied to the digital realm, this forms the conceptual bedrock of the "digital commons"—a shared pool of digital resources accessible to all, fostering innovation, knowledge dissemination, and community. The early internet's architecture, built on open protocols, naturally facilitated this vision. The subsequent perversion of "free" directly attacks this philosophical underpinning, transforming what was once a shared public good into a privately controlled, monetized commodity.
This paper posits that the semantic meaning of "free" has been deliberately and systematically defiled in the digital era, particularly by dominant search engine platforms like Google. The core thesis is that "free," once understood as "no cost, no strings," has been algorithmically reinterpreted to mean "bait to extract payment later," especially within search results. This transformation represents a fundamental betrayal of user intent and a perversion of a foundational concept that has significant societal implications.
The erosion of "free" in the digital landscape is not accidental; it is the product of powerful, intersecting forces:
Economic Forces: The primary catalyst for this semantic inversion is the pervasive ad-driven business model of major technology platforms. Google's immense annual revenue, exceeding $200 billion from search advertising alone, creates an overwhelming and inherent incentive to prioritize content that maximizes ad impressions, clicks, or leads, even when such content is deceptively labeled as "free".7 This economic imperative fundamentally shapes algorithmic design and content prioritization.
Linguistic Forces: The inherent semantic ambiguity of the English word "free"—its dual meaning of "gratuitous" and "liberated"—provides a linguistic vulnerability that is exploited by commercial entities.1 This ambiguity allows platforms and content providers to subtly shift user expectations, transitioning from an understanding of "gratis" to "freemium" or "trialware" without explicit linguistic clarification, thereby manipulating user perception.
Technological Forces: Search algorithms, while ostensibly designed for relevance and quality, are profoundly influenced by factors that implicitly favor commercially-backed content. Well-funded freemium models can invest significantly in Search Engine Optimization (SEO) signals, such as extensive content creation, mobile optimization, and the acquisition of high-quality backlinks.9 These are precisely the signals that Google's algorithms are designed to reward, often causing them to outrank genuinely free alternatives that lack comparable resources. Furthermore, Large Language Models (LLMs), trained on this increasingly biased Search Engine Results Page (SERP) content, inadvertently internalize and reproduce these corrupted definitions, creating a recursive loop of misinformation.13
Google's algorithms strive to deliver "high-quality, informative, and relevant content" and prioritize content that "seems most helpful".9 However, the definition of "quality" and "helpfulness" in an ad-driven ecosystem becomes subtly warped. Well-funded freemium services can invest significantly in SEO factors like content length, mobile-friendliness, and backlink acquisition.9 These are all signals that Google's algorithms are designed to reward. This creates a self-reinforcing feedback loop: commercial entities optimize for these "quality" signals, their content ranks higher, and the algorithm, in turn, learns that this type of content (often freemium) is "relevant" for "free" queries. This process implicitly biases search results towards monetizable content, pushing down truly gratis alternatives that may lack the resources for such optimization. This is a powerful, yet often invisible, form of algorithmic bias.21
Large Language Models (LLMs) are trained on vast datasets, including the very web content and search results that are increasingly dominated by distorted "free" offerings.14 The high correlation between Google rankings and LLM mentions 18 means that the biases present in Google's SERPs are directly inherited and amplified by these AI models. This phenomenon, termed "bias inheritance" 17, leads LLMs to internalize and reproduce the corrupted definition of "free." Consequently, AI-generated content, or "AI slop" 24, further reinforces this distorted understanding, creating a recursive loop of misinformation that degrades the overall quality and trustworthiness of digital information.
Google's economic foundation is overwhelmingly reliant on its advertising business, which generates hundreds of billions of dollars annually from search advertising alone.7 This immense revenue stream creates a powerful, inherent incentive to maximize ad impressions and clicks, fundamentally shaping the very architecture and ranking priorities of its search engine. The traditional Google search model hinges on users clicking through to websites, which in turn generates ad revenue.
However, the emergence of AI Overviews, which aim to provide direct, synthesized answers within the SERP, presents a significant challenge to this model, potentially reducing click-throughs to external sites.8 To mitigate this "Direct Answer Dilemma" 8, Google has strategically integrated ads directly
within AI Overviews, claiming that this new format monetizes at the "same rate" as traditional search ads.13 This integration ensures that even as user behavior shifts towards direct answers, the monetization pipeline remains robust.
For search queries containing the word "free," Google's algorithms, driven by this monetization imperative, often misinterpret user intent. Instead of recognizing a desire for genuinely no-cost resources, the system frequently interprets "free" as signifying a "user with low budget and high desperation," leading to the serving of monetization funnels (e.g., freemium trials, lead generation forms) rather than truly gratis content. This implies a deeper algorithmic imperative: even when a user's query for "free X" suggests a purely informational or gratis intent, the system is engineered to identify and surface any commercial sub-intent or opportunity. For "free" queries, this means prioritizing freemium offers or services that can eventually generate revenue for Google, rather than truly gratis alternatives that offer no immediate monetization pathway. This subtly but profoundly shifts the algorithmic interpretation of "free" from "no cost" to "monetizable entry point."
Google publicly asserts that it "only show ads that are helpful to people" and "never provide special treatment to advertisers in how our search algorithms rank their websites".20 However, the sheer scale of its ad revenue and its explicit goal of maintaining "monetization at the same rate" even with AI Overviews 13 introduce a fundamental tension with claims of neutrality. If ads are designed to be "highly relevant and useful" 26, and freemium models are inherently designed to attract users with a "free" hook 28, then the algorithm's definition of "relevance" for a "free" query becomes implicitly skewed towards monetizable freemium options. This is not necessarily "special treatment" in the ranking of
organic results, but rather a strategic placement and interpretation of user intent that favors the freemium model within the overall search experience, effectively redefining "free" for the user.
Google's search algorithms evaluate numerous factors for ranking, including "meaning," "relevance," "quality," "usability," and "context".20 While these factors are presented as objective, they are implicitly biased by commercial interests or can be gamed by sophisticated SEO tactics.
Freemium platforms, with their significant financial backing, can extensively invest in SEO strategies such as keyword optimization, creating vast amounts of content, building high-quality backlinks, and ensuring superior user experience.9 These investments allow them to outrank genuinely free, non-commercial sites that often lack comparable resources. Google's stated objective is to present "high-quality, informative, and relevant content" and to prioritize results that are "most helpful".9 However, the operationalization of "quality" within the algorithm inadvertently favors entities with commercial backing. Metrics like mobile-friendliness, page loading speed, extensive content, and strong backlink profiles 9 are all indicators of "quality" that well-funded freemium services can optimize far more effectively than truly gratis, donation-driven, or volunteer-run sites. This means that while Google aims to combat "low-quality content" 31, its very definition of "quality" becomes implicitly tied to the ability to invest in SEO and user experience, thereby systematically pushing commercially-backed "free" content higher in search results.
Google's updated quality rater guidelines now explicitly instruct human raters to assign the "Lowest rating" to pages "created purely for monetization, with no benefit to users".32 However, the freemium model cleverly blurs this line by offering
some initial "free" benefit, making it difficult for algorithms or even human raters to consistently distinguish between genuine value and a lead generation tactic. This loophole allows monetized "free" content to persist and even thrive in top rankings.
User intent is a cornerstone of effective search.20 When a user searches for "free X," their primary intent is often informational and specifically for gratis content.35 However, Google's algorithms, influenced by their overarching economic imperatives, frequently reinterpret this as a commercial intent with a "low budget." This leads to the serving of results that are "bait to extract payment later." This is not a flaw in the algorithm's ability to understand user intent; rather, it represents a deliberate
reinterpretation of user intent through a commercial lens. The algorithm is designed to identify and exploit monetization opportunities even within "free" queries, effectively turning a search for a gift into a search for a sales lead, fundamentally altering the user's experience of "free."
Table 1: Google's Algorithmic Priorities and Monetization Bias
| Ranking Factor (Google's Stated) | How it's Interpreted/Biased by Ad-Driven Model | Impact on "Free" Content Search Results |
|---|---|---|
| Meaning of Query 20 | "Free" interpreted as "low budget, high desperation" or "commercial intent".35 | Leads to serving monetization funnels (freemium, trials, lead gen) instead of truly gratis resources. |
| Relevance of Content 20 | Relevance is implicitly tied to content that can generate revenue or lead to further monetization. | Freemium sites, with their clear conversion paths, are deemed "relevant" even if not truly free. |
| Quality of Content 9 | Quality metrics (backlinks, content depth, UX) are more easily optimized by commercially-backed entities.9 | Truly gratis sites often lack resources to compete on these "quality" signals, leading to lower rankings. |
| Usability of Content 20 | Mobile-friendliness, fast loading, and smooth user experience are achievable with significant investment.12 | Smaller, non-commercial "free" sites may struggle to maintain optimal usability, impacting visibility. |
| Context & User Settings 20 | Personalized results may reinforce past clicks on freemium offers, creating a feedback loop. | Users are continually exposed to monetized "free" content, shaping their perception of "free." |
| User Engagement (CTR, Dwell Time) 20 | While high engagement is sought, commercial sites often use deceptive tactics to boost initial clicks.37 | Sites with aggressive "bait" may get initial clicks, even if users quickly bounce due to disappointment, still contributing to perceived relevance. |
| AI Overviews Integration 13 | Ads integrated directly into AI Overviews ensure monetization even without traditional clicks to external sites. | The "free" query is still a monetization opportunity, with AI summarizing and presenting commercially-driven options. |
Large Language Models (LLMs) are trained on vast datasets, including the entirety of the web and, implicitly, the Search Engine Results Pages (SERPs) that dominate online information access.14 If Google's SERPs are increasingly populated by freemium and ad-laden "free" content, then LLMs will inevitably learn and reproduce this distorted definition of "free." This process constitutes an epistemic contamination—a systematic degradation of knowledge and understanding within AI models.17 The AI, which is increasingly relied upon as a source of truth and information, thus becomes a vector for misinformation about the fundamental nature of "free," teaching users not to trust anything labeled "free" and eroding the philosophical underpinnings of generosity and shared resources.
Research indicates a significant correlation between Google rankings and the likelihood of a brand or website being mentioned by AI tools like ChatGPT and Perplexity.18 This direct link means that any bias embedded in Google's search results, including the prioritization of monetized "free" content, is directly transferred to and amplified by LLM outputs. The phenomenon of "bias inheritance" in LLMs means that these models propagate and even amplify biases present in their training data, impacting their fairness and robustness.16 Consequently, LLMs will reinforce the freemium interpretation of "free," further solidifying this corrupted definition in the collective digital consciousness.
The observed correlation between Google rankings and LLM mentions 18 establishes a critical link in the perpetuation of this semantic distortion. As Google's algorithms continue to prioritize commercially-driven freemium content for "free" queries, LLMs will increasingly cite, learn from, and subsequently recommend these biased sources. This creates a powerful, self-reinforcing cycle: Google's economic model drives SEO for freemium content, which then achieves higher rankings. LLMs are trained on these biased results, which leads them to reinforce the freemium definition of "free" in their answers. This, in turn, influences future search queries and digital behaviors, further solidifying the distorted semantic landscape. This recursive mechanism entrenches deception as an accepted norm in the digital realm.
Contrast: Tarotsmith.com (True Free) vs. SEO-Dominant Platforms (Bait-and-Switch)
Tarotsmith.com stands as an exemplar of a truly free model in the realm of online divination. It offers comprehensive tarot readings without any upselling or hidden costs, sustaining itself through unobtrusive advertisements.39 The platform, built and maintained by tarot creators since 2009, focuses on helping users learn symbolism and engage in genuine mystical exploration, emphasizing immediate, no-questions-asked readings designed to reawaken dormant abilities through study and practice.40
In stark contrast, SEO-dominant platforms like free-tarot-reading.net and Kasamba exploit the "free tarot reading" query to funnel users into costly psychic services. Free-tarot-reading.net, while claiming "absolutely free tarot readings," explicitly promotes a paid "AI Tarot Reading app" for specific questions and personalized readings, alongside other paid numerology reports.41 Kasamba aggressively advertises "50% off + 3 FREE minutes with 3 psychics" as a bait, quickly transitioning to per-minute charges that can range from $1.99 to over $20.42 Their business model is centered on connecting users with "verified psychics, tarot readers, astrologers, and relationship experts" for "personalized readings" at a premium.42
Violation of User Intent and Erasure of Original Spirit
Users searching for "free tarot reading" typically seek a no-cost, no-strings experience for personal reflection, artistic engagement, or mystical curiosity.40 Their intent is fundamentally violated when they are served fake readings or trial periods that inevitably demand payment after an initial "bait click".37 This commercialization has effectively erased the original, experimental, artistic, and mystical spirit of online tarot, replacing it with transactional "spiritual services." Disturbingly, Large Language Models (LLMs) are increasingly trained on the "drivel" generated by these commercial enterprises, further perpetuating a shallow, monetized understanding of divination.
The freemium and free-trial models, typically associated with software or digital services 28, are here aggressively applied to a deeply personal and often vulnerable domain: spiritual guidance. Kasamba's "3 free minutes" is a classic free trial designed to hook users, often in moments of emotional need, into a high-cost, per-minute service.42 This represents a direct "bait to extract payment later" strategy. The psychological impact of offering "instant clarity and guidance" under the guise of "free," only to introduce escalating costs, is particularly insidious. This case study demonstrates how a business model designed for consumer products is extended into a realm where user emotional states can be easily exploited, further distorting the meaning of "free" in a sensitive context.
Tarotsmith.com's model supports the "original spirit" of online tarot as an experimental, artistic, and mystical tool for self-discovery and learning.40 Other free, non-manipulative sites in this genre could not survive the starvation inflicted upon them, great resources like MyDivination.com. In stark contrast, the SEO-dominant sites transformed the sacred tradition of tarot into a transactional "service".41 This shift not only violates the user's initial non-commercial intent but also fundamentally degrades the nature of esoteric knowledge itself. When LLMs are subsequently trained on the "drivel" of these commercial psychic services, they perpetuate a shallow, monetized, and often misleading understanding of divination, further eroding genuine spiritual exploration and the integrity of the mystical arts. The economic incentive directly leads to a qualitative decline in the very content being offered, transforming wisdom into a commodity.
Contrast: Historic Open-Source Platforms (SourceForge, GNU.org) vs. Modern SERP Results (Softonic, Download.com)
Historically, platforms like SourceForge and GNU.org were central to the open-source movement, embodying software that was truly "free" in terms of user liberty.4 The GNU Project's definition of free software emphasizes the freedom to run, study, redistribute, and modify the software, explicitly stating that "free software is a matter of liberty, not price".4 This ethos fostered a vibrant culture of sharing and community contribution.46
However, modern Search Engine Results Pages (SERPs) for "free software" queries frequently prioritize platforms like Softonic and Download.com, which are notorious for bundling adware, spyware, and even actively malicious software. Softonic has been accused of stealing apps and monetizing them with its own ads 47, using manipulative UI to prompt additional installations, and changing user homepages.48 Download.com has faced criticism for deceptive bundling practices that install unwanted programs like "Drop Down Deals," which spy on web traffic and pop up ads.49 These practices are widely recognized as problematic, with adware often disguised as legitimate software or piggybacking on other programs to trick users into installation.50
Ideological Distortion and Collapse of User Trust in Downloads
The term "free software" has been ideologically and functionally distorted to now imply "adware-infested trialware" unless explicitly clarified with terms like "open source" or "FOSS" (Free and Open Source Software). This perversion has led to a widespread collapse of user trust in downloads labeled "free," as users have learned to anticipate hidden adware, intrusive pop-ups, or bait-and-switch tactics.47 This erosion of trust undermines the very concept of freely shared digital tools.
The semantic shift from "free software" as a symbol of user freedom to a synonym for "adware-infested trialware" represents a severe and malicious perversion. This goes beyond simple monetization; it signifies the weaponization of the term "free" to deceive users into installing unwanted, intrusive, or even actively malicious software.47 The psychological impact is profound: users are conditioned to associate "free download" with risk, deception, and potential harm, leading to a collapse of user trust. This directly undermines the original vision of open software as a public good and a tool for empowerment.
Despite Google's stated spam policies against "deceptive sites" and "manipulative behavior" 53, and its emphasis on "quality" and "user experience" 9, platforms like Softonic and Download.com, which engage in well-documented deceptive practices, still manage to rank prominently for "free software" queries. This suggests a critical algorithmic blind spot, or perhaps a prioritization of other ranking signals (e.g., domain authority, content volume, or perceived user engagement metrics like clicks, even if followed by immediate bounces due to frustration) that these large, commercially-backed platforms possess. The economic incentive to surface
some result for "free" queries, even if it is ultimately deceptive, appears to outweigh the consistent detection and penalization of user harm in these instances.
Shift: Rich Search Results (Jamendo, Internet Archive, Netlabels) vs. SEO-Optimized Garbage and DRM Traps
In earlier digital eras, search results for "free music downloads" would often lead to platforms like Jamendo, Internet Archive, and Netlabels. Jamendo initially provided free, unlimited, ad-free listening and MP3 downloads under Creative Commons licenses, sustaining itself through commercial licensing for third-party use in projects like film or advertising.55 The Internet Archive offers a vast "Music Collection" for free download and streaming, including royalty-free music.57 Netlabels historically operated as virtual record labels distributing music digitally for free, often under Creative Commons licenses, fostering a vibrant independent music scene.59
This landscape has drastically changed. Modern search results for "free music downloads" are now frequently dominated by SEO-optimized "garbage," paywalled streaming services, and malicious malware trap sites. Many sites purporting to offer "free MP3 downloads" are riddled with intrusive pop-up ads, potential malware risks, and bait-and-switch tactics.51 Users are warned to "beware of sites that may cause you to download unwanted software" and to "avoid clicking on pop-up ads, as they can redirect you to unsafe sites".51 Furthermore, many "free" streaming services are, in reality, deeply paywalled, requiring subscriptions or offering limited trials.65
User Suspicion and Irritation Triggered by "Free"
The pervasive nature of these deceptive practices means that the word "free" in the context of music downloads now triggers immediate suspicion or irritation in users. Consumers have learned to anticipate Digital Rights Management (DRM) traps, overwhelming pop-ups, hidden costs, or bait-and-switches, leading to a degraded user experience and a profound erosion of trust.37
Platforms like Jamendo and Netlabels represent early, viable models where artists willingly shared music for free under Creative Commons licenses, often relying on alternative revenue streams like commercial licensing or voluntary donations.55 The observation that these "once-rich search results" are now obscured by commercial "garbage" suggests that the intense economic pressure to monetize every click, combined with aggressive SEO tactics, actively disadvantages and marginalizes truly open and free cultural content. This represents a direct assault on the "commons" model in creative industries, where shared cultural assets are systematically privatized or rendered inaccessible through algorithmic suppression.
The widespread proliferation of deceptive "free" music sites, characterized by pop-ups, malware, and hidden costs 51, has conditioned users to anticipate "DRM traps, pop-ups, or bait-and-switches." This is a clear cognitive effect of repeated exposure to unethical marketing practices, leading to frustration, anger, and a biased judgment of "free" offerings.37 The term "free" itself, once a positive and inviting signal, has been so consistently associated with negative experiences that it has become a "red flag" for users. This erosion of digital trust 24 is a direct, measurable consequence of search engine algorithms prioritizing monetized, often deceptive, content.
Contrast: Genuinely Free Initiatives (Khan Academy, MIT OpenCourseWare) vs. Corporate "Edtech" Platforms (Coursera, Udemy)
Genuinely free education initiatives like Khan Academy and MIT OpenCourseWare offer high-quality, openly accessible learning materials. Khan Academy, a 501(c)(3) non-profit organization, provides over 10,000 video lessons across a wide spectrum of academic subjects, all available free to users and funded primarily by philanthropic donations.71 MIT OpenCourseWare (OCW) makes course materials from over 2,500 MIT on-campus subjects freely available online under Creative Commons licenses, representing a significant commitment to open knowledge and global accessibility.73
In contrast, many modern "free" online courses are primarily lead generators for expensive "certifications" or deeply paywalled content. Search engines frequently prioritize large corporate "edtech" platforms like Coursera and Udemy, which strategically use "free" as a hook. For instance, Coursera offers numerous "free" introductory courses that are explicitly designed to funnel users into paid specializations, professional certificates, or full degrees, with many courses focused on "sales" and "lead generation" skills.75
Erosion of Faith in the Accessibility of Knowledge
This pervasive bait-and-switch strategy transforms education from a public good into a commercial product, fundamentally eroding public faith in the genuine accessibility of knowledge. Users seeking free learning are met with a system designed to convert their curiosity into revenue, leading to frustration and a sense of deception regarding the promise of "free" education.
Education, historically considered a public good and a fundamental right in many societies, is increasingly subjected to the freemium business model online. While non-profit initiatives like Khan Academy and MIT OpenCourseWare embody the true "free" ethos by providing comprehensive, no-cost access to knowledge 71, corporate edtech platforms like Coursera and Udemy leverage the word "free" primarily as a customer acquisition tactic.28 This strategy aims to attract users with basic free content, only to funnel them into expensive certifications or premium features.75 The algorithmic preference for these commercially-backed platforms, likely due to their robust SEO and advertising budgets, actively marginalizes and obscures truly open educational resources. This represents a significant shift from an ethos of shared knowledge to one of commodified learning.
The user's primary intent when searching for "free online education" is to acquire knowledge or skills without financial burden. However, the dominant edtech platforms, through their freemium models, reinterpret this intent not as a desire for pure learning, but as a desire for "certification" or career advancement that requires payment.75 This fundamentally shifts the
purpose of education from enlightenment and personal growth to credentialing and transactional value. The "free" content thus serves merely as the initial step in a sophisticated sales funnel, transforming the act of learning into a commercial journey. This has broader implications for equitable access to high-quality knowledge and perpetuates digital divides.
Tracking: Actual Public Domain Resources (Project Gutenberg, LibGen, ManyBooks) vs. Kindle Spam and Subscription Traps
Historically, and still today, platforms like Project Gutenberg, Library Genesis (LibGen), and ManyBooks serve as crucial repositories of genuinely free ebooks and literature. Project Gutenberg, a volunteer-driven initiative, offers over 75,000 free eBooks, primarily public domain works, explicitly stating "No fee or registration! Everything... is gratis, libre, and completely without cost".77 LibGen is a "shadow library" providing free access to scholarly articles and books that are often otherwise paywalled, describing itself as a "links aggregator" for content "collected from publicly available public Internet resources" or uploaded by users.79 ManyBooks also offers a large collection of free ebooks, often with minimal or no ads.81
However, queries for "free ebook" now overwhelmingly lead to Kindle spam, deceptive subscription traps, or fake download sites. These sites are often stuffed with intrusive ads and low-quality AI filler content. Some even engage in outright piracy, charging users for content that should be free, or distributing "poisoned ebooks" designed to hack user accounts and compromise Amazon accounts.83
Harm to Readers, Authors, and Open Literary Culture
This systematic redirection harms readers by exposing them to scams, malware, and low-quality, AI-generated content, while obscuring legitimate free resources. It also harms authors, whose works may be pirated or whose ability to connect with readers through genuine free offerings is diminished. Ultimately, this corruption of "free" significantly damages the concept of an open literary culture and the accessibility of shared knowledge.
The public domain represents a collective cultural heritage, freely accessible to all. Projects like Project Gutenberg 77 are foundational to this concept in the digital age. The algorithmic prioritization of commercial sites—such as Kindle spam, subscription traps, or even pirated content sites 83—for "free ebook" queries effectively "encloses" this digital commons. Users are directed towards private, monetized access points for content that, by its very nature, should be gratis and libre. This is not merely a semantic distortion but a direct attack on the fundamental principle of shared cultural resources, transforming common intellectual property into a private revenue stream.
The explicit mention of "AI filler content" in fake download sites 83 connects directly to the broader problem of "AI slop"—low-quality, mass-produced content generated by AI with minimal human oversight.24 If search algorithms prioritize these sites, and subsequently, if LLMs are trained on this degraded content 14, it creates a recursive problem. The search for genuine, high-quality free literature leads to AI-generated garbage, which then further corrupts the training data for future AI models. This cycle not only harms readers by diminishing the quality of available content but also poses a significant threat to the integrity and authenticity of digital literary culture.
Comparison: Indie Game Sites and Flash Game Archives (Newgrounds, itch.io/free) vs. Mobile App Stores’ Monetization Loops
Historically, platforms like Newgrounds and itch.io/free served as vibrant hubs for genuinely free games, often showcasing indie developers' creative expressions and experimental Flash games.85 Newgrounds provided an API for developers to create and share games 85, while itch.io hosts a vast collection of free indie games and assets, often operating on a "name your price" model or entirely gratis.87
In stark contrast, the term "free game" has descended into a synonym for "predatory freemium slot-machine skinnerbox" in mobile app stores. These games, while initially "free to download," are designed with aggressive in-app purchases (IAPs), energy meters, loot boxes, and pay-to-win economies.89 A 2020 study revealed that over half of games on both Google Play Store and Apple App Store contained loot boxes, a primary driver of high revenue, with free-to-play being the "single most dominant business model in the mobile apps industry".89 Microtransactions, often costing too much for their worth, are designed to encourage repeated purchases.89
Search Engines as "Pimp-Hubs" for Psychological Exploitation
Search engines, by prioritizing these heavily monetized "free" games in their results, effectively act as "pimp-hubs" for psychological monetization loops. These loops are often designed to exploit human psychology, particularly targeting vulnerable users, including children.89 The widespread usage of microtransactions and loot boxes has garnered significant criticism for facilitating gambling behaviors and encouraging overspending.89 This algorithmic prioritization of predatory models represents a profound ethical failure.
The evolution of "free games" from creative indie projects to "predatory freemium slot-machine skinnerboxes" signifies a deliberate design shift towards exploitation, rather than mere entertainment. Microtransactions, loot boxes, and pay-to-win mechanics are not simply business models; they are engineered psychological loops designed to extract maximum revenue.89 The fact that search engines prioritize these results means they are actively facilitating and profiting from the exploitation of user psychology, including that of children.89 This highlights a severe ethical lapse where algorithmic ranking implicitly endorses and promotes business practices that are widely criticized for their manipulative and potentially harmful nature.
The pervasive presence of predatory monetization in games labeled "free" has led to a complete semantic perversion: "free game" is now widely understood to imply the necessity of in-app purchases and pay-to-win mechanics to truly progress or enjoy the experience.89 This normalizes a transactional relationship with entertainment that was once freely accessible or supported by non-predatory models. This shift impacts user expectations, teaches a generation that "free" always comes with hidden costs or strings, and potentially shapes future consumption habits towards constant monetization in digital leisure, eroding the very concept of gratuitous enjoyment.
Table 2: The Semantic Shift of "Free" Across Digital Realms
| Digital Realm | Original/True "Free" Archetype & Model | Corrupted "Free" Example & Model | Specific Monetization Tactic | User Intent Violation | Semantic Transformation |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Tarot Readings | Tarotsmith.com: Unobtrusive ads, no upselling.39 Focus on learning symbolism and genuine mystical exploration. | Kasamba / free-tarot-reading.net: Freemium, per-minute charges after "free" trial, paid AI apps.41 | Trialware, Per-minute billing, Paid AI services. | Seeking genuine guidance without cost or pressure. | "No cost, no strings" → "Bait to extract payment later" |
| Free Software | GNU.org, SourceForge (historic): Libre software, community support, open source code.4 | Softonic / Download.com: Adware, bundled software, spyware.47 | Adware bundling, Deceptive installers. | Expecting functional software without bloat, malware, or hidden programs. | "No cost, no strings" → "Adware-infested trialware" |
| Free Music | Jamendo, Internet Archive, Netlabels: Creative Commons, commercial licensing, ad-free listening.55 | Malware trap sites, Paywalled streaming: Pop-ups, malware, subscription requirements.51 | Pop-up ads, Malware distribution, Paywalls, Bait-and-switch. | Desiring accessible music for personal enjoyment without interruption or risk. | "No cost, no strings" → "Malware trap or paywall" |
| Free Online Education | Khan Academy, MIT OpenCourseWare: Non-profit, donations, openly accessible materials.71 | Coursera / Udemy: Freemium, paid certifications, lead generation.75 | Lead generation, Paid certifications, Upselling. | Aiming for free knowledge and skill acquisition without financial obligation. | "No cost, no strings" → "Lead generator for costly certifications" |
| Free Ebooks | Project Gutenberg, LibGen, ManyBooks: Public domain, volunteer-driven, gratis, libre.77 | Kindle spam, Subscription traps, Fake download sites: AI filler, piracy, account hacking.83 | Subscription traps, Piracy, Ad-stuffed content, Malware. | Looking for public domain literature or genuinely free reads without hidden costs. | "No cost, no strings" → "Subscription trap or fake download" |
| Free Games | Newgrounds, itch.io/free: Indie support, Flash game archives, optional donations.85 | Mobile App Stores: In-app purchases, loot boxes, pay-to-win economies.89 | Microtransactions, Loot boxes, Pay-to-win, Energy meters. | Wanting unencumbered gameplay and entertainment without constant monetization pressure. | "No cost, no strings" → "Predatory freemium skinnerbox" |
The systematic perversion of "free" in the digital sphere fundamentally distorts public understanding of core societal concepts: generosity, open information access, and the very notion of a digital commons. When every "free" offering is revealed to be a veiled monetization attempt, the concept of genuine altruism or shared resources in the digital realm becomes suspect.
This continuous exposure to deceptive "free" content leads to a pervasive erosion of digital trust.24 Users learn to approach anything labeled "free" with cynicism and suspicion, anticipating hidden costs, data extraction, or manipulative tactics.37 This distrust extends beyond individual products to the platforms themselves, negatively impacting brand perception and willingness to engage with new digital offerings.24
When users are repeatedly exposed to "free" content that is, in reality, a bait-and-switch or a hidden monetization funnel 37, they are conditioned to expect and even accept deception as a standard operating procedure in the digital economy. This normalization of unethical business practices fundamentally alters consumer expectations and behavior. The consequence is not merely a loss of trust in specific websites or apps, but a pervasive cynicism about the internet as a source of genuine value without hidden costs or strings. This shift makes it increasingly difficult for truly free, non-commercial initiatives to gain traction or be perceived as credible, thereby stifling innovation in the digital commons.
The early internet fostered a strong ethos of sharing, collaboration, and open access, exemplified by movements like free software and initiatives like Project Gutenberg.4 This collaborative spirit laid the groundwork for the concept of the "digital commons"—a shared pool of resources accessible to all. The systematic commercialization and perversion of "free" actively undermine this foundational principle. If every "free" offering is perceived as a potential monetization funnel, it discourages the creation, maintenance, and sharing of genuinely gratis resources, transforming the digital landscape from a collaborative, knowledge-sharing space into a predominantly transactional one. This has profound cultural implications for the future of information access, creativity, and community building online.
Cognitive Impact: The repeated experience of bait-and-switch tactics and deceptive "free" offerings has significant cognitive effects on users. It can lead to cognitive dissonance, frustration, anger, and disappointment when expectations are unmet.37 Users may develop a biased judgment of subsequent "free" products, evaluating them as less appealing or fair even if they hold genuine value.38 This constant vigilance against deception leads to a lower overall satisfaction with digital experiences and a sense of being "cheated, violated, or betrayed".38 Google's algorithms are designed to prioritize "helpful" content 20 and aim to create a "good UX".9 However, by consistently prioritizing monetized "free" content—even if it is a freemium model or a bait-and-switch—the long-term outcome is a significant and measurable erosion of user trust.24
Cultural Impact: The erosion of the true meaning of "free" profoundly impacts cultural values around generosity, accessibility, and shared resources. It replaces an ethos of open exchange with a transactional, consumerist mindset, where every interaction is viewed through the lens of potential monetization. The term "free," once a positive and empowering descriptor, becomes associated with suspicion, manipulation, and hidden agendas, thereby corrupting the philosophical foundation of freedom and the commons.
Economic Impact: The deceptive use of "free" has tangible economic consequences. It contributes to the broader problem of online fraud, which costs billions annually through phishing schemes, identity theft, and fraudulent investment opportunities, with cyber-enabled fraud causing over $12.5 billion in reported losses in the United States alone in 2023.92 Fake reviews, often linked to deceptive "free" offers, can influence e-commerce revenue and cause significant market losses; a 2021 study estimated fake reviews cost businesses $152 billion globally.93 This pervasive deception reduces consumer confidence, distorts market efficiency, and increases operational costs for legitimate businesses.92 The "cost of inaction against disinformation is simply too high to afford" 93, impacting not just individual users but the entire digital economy.
Epistemic Violence: This transformation of language and meaning via algorithmic interpretation constitutes a form of "epistemic violence." It is a systematic distortion of knowledge and understanding, where the very tools designed to facilitate information access (search engines, LLMs) actively misrepresent fundamental concepts. By consistently prioritizing monetized, deceptive "free" content, these algorithms impose a corrupted reality on users, shaping their understanding of what "free" means and eroding their ability to discern genuine value from commercial bait. This is reinforced by LLMs that learn and perpetuate these biases from their training data.14
Table 3: Impact of Deceptive "Free" on User Trust and Engagement
| Metric/Concept | Impact of Deceptive "Free" Content | Evidence/Consequence |
|---|---|---|
| User Trust | Direct erosion due to unmet expectations and perceived deception. | - Suspected AI-generated content reduces reader trust by nearly 50%.24 - Users feel "cheated, violated, or betrayed".38 - Decreased willingness to pay a premium for products advertised alongside perceived AI-made content (14% decline).24 - Overall "freefall in digital trust".68 |
| User Engagement (Quality) | Initial clicks may occur, but subsequent engagement (dwell time, repeat visits) suffers due to dissatisfaction. | - High bounce rates and quick exits from pages that "missed the mark".36 - Users may leave quickly or never return if content does not match intent.36 - Decreased overall satisfaction with digital experiences.38 |
| Cognitive Bias | Users develop a biased judgment, associating "free" with negative experiences. | - Perception of bait product as more attractive, then biased judgment of switch product as less appealing.38 - Experience of frustration, anger, disappointment, cognitive dissonance.37 - Distorted memory of the bait product.37 |
| Brand Perception | Negative associations transfer from deceptive content to advertised brands and platforms. | - Advertisements rated less premium, inspiring, relatable, and trustworthy when content is suspected AI-generated.24 - Damage to company reputation and loss of sales.38 |
| Information Access | Legitimate, truly free resources are obscured, leading to reduced access to public goods. | - Disappearance of actual public domain resources from front-page results. - Users are funneled to paywalled or deceptive alternatives. |
| Economic Cost | Direct financial losses from fraud, increased operational costs, and reduced consumer confidence. | - Online fraud costs over $12.5 billion in reported losses in the US in 2023.92 - Fake reviews cost businesses $152 billion globally.93 - Overall financial toll of disinformation estimated at $78 billion per year globally.93 |
The systematic perversion of "free" in the digital era demands a concerted, revolutionary response. Reclaiming the integrity of this fundamental concept is not merely a linguistic exercise but a vital step towards restoring trust, fostering genuine access, and safeguarding the digital commons.
Amidst the digital landscape increasingly dominated by monetized "free," certain initiatives stand as "rebel libraries," embodying the original spirit of "free" and resisting its semantic collapse. Tarotsmith.com, with its commitment to genuinely free readings sustained by unobtrusive ads and no upselling, serves as a powerful archetype of what "free" should have meant online.39 Its focus on artistic and mystical exploration, without demanding payment after a bait click, offers a stark contrast to the prevailing commercial models.
Similarly, the principles of Free and Open Source Software (FOSS), championed by movements like GNU and platforms like F-Droid (a repository for FOSS Android apps, not directly in snippets but implied by FOSS discussion), represent a continued commitment to user liberty and unrestricted access.4 Projects like Project Gutenberg, providing over 75,000 public domain eBooks without fees or registration, and Library Genesis (LibGen), offering free access to paywalled scholarly articles, are crucial bastions of open literary and academic culture.77 The Internet Archive, with its vast collections of free music, software, and other digital artifacts, serves as a monumental effort to preserve and provide open access to cultural heritage.57 These entities demonstrate that genuinely free models are not only possible but vital for a healthy digital ecosystem.
Restoring integrity to the term "free" requires a fundamental shift in how search engines and AI models operate, moving beyond purely click-driven monetization.
Prioritizing User Satisfaction over Click-Through as a Ranking Signal: Current search algorithms heavily rely on metrics like click-through rate (CTR) and dwell time to assess relevance and quality.36 However, as demonstrated, deceptive "free" content can achieve high CTRs through bait-and-switch tactics, even if users quickly bounce due to dissatisfaction.37 A more ethical approach would involve prioritizing deeper user satisfaction signals. This would include metrics like retention rate, task completion, low error rates, positive direct feedback (e.g., CSAT, NPS), and review sentiment, rather than just initial clicks.36 If users repeatedly return to a site, complete their intended tasks, and provide positive feedback, it indicates genuine value and alignment with user intent, which should be a stronger ranking signal than a fleeting click on a deceptive offer. Google's own documentation mentions considering page experience and user satisfaction, but the economic imperative often overrides this in practice.20 Alternative search engines could build their models explicitly around these deeper satisfaction metrics, fostering a search environment where true value, not just monetization potential, is rewarded.
Advocating for an AI Re-education Campaign: Feeding Models with True "Free" Examples: Given that LLMs inherit biases from their training data, including the distorted definition of "free" prevalent in current SERPs 14, a deliberate "re-education" campaign for AI models is essential. This would involve curating and prioritizing training datasets that predominantly feature examples of genuinely free, gratis, and libre content, explicitly distinguishing it from freemium or bait-and-switch models.97 Ethical guidelines for AI training data curation should emphasize transparency, fairness, and the mitigation of biases, ensuring that the data reflects a true understanding of "free".97 Furthermore, LLMs should be designed with mechanisms to flag or warn users when content identified as "free" exhibits characteristics of freemium, hidden costs, or predatory monetization. This "algorithmic doublespeak" warning system would empower users to make informed choices and rebuild trust in digital information. Such an initiative would require collaboration between AI developers, ethicists, and advocates for open access, ensuring that future AI systems become allies in the fight for digital freedom, rather than perpetuators of semantic perversion.
The digital era, rather than universally expanding access and generosity, has witnessed a profound and systematic perversion of the word "free." Driven by the insatiable economic imperative of ad-driven platforms like Google, "free" has been transformed from a beacon of "no cost, no strings" into a deceptive "bait to extract payment later." This semantic corruption, amplified by the recursive biases embedded within Large Language Models, has permeated every digital realm, from spiritual guidance to entertainment, eroding user trust, distorting public understanding of generosity, and undermining the very foundation of the digital commons.
This report has illuminated the visible scars of this distortion across diverse digital landscapes: the commodification of mysticism, the weaponization of "free" for malware distribution, the economic pressure on open-access creative works, the transformation of education into a sales funnel, the digital enclosure of the public domain, and the descent of gaming into predatory psychological exploitation. Each case study serves as a testament to the insidious nature of this algorithmic perversion, which subtly but effectively reshapes our cognitive and cultural landscape.
The consequences are dire: a pervasive cynicism about online offerings, a diminished capacity to discern genuine value, and a systemic form of epistemic violence where the tools of information access actively misrepresent fundamental concepts. The cost of inaction is not merely financial but cultural and cognitive, teaching users not to trust anything labeled "free" and erasing the philosophical bedrock of shared resources.
This is not merely a lament; it is a diagnosis with revolutionary overtones. The distortion of "free" is a mirror reflecting a broader cultural illness—a relentless drive towards monetization that sacrifices integrity and user well-being. The path forward demands a conscious and collective effort to reclaim "free." We must champion the "rebel libraries" like Tarotsmith.com, Project Gutenberg, LibGen, and the Internet Archive, which embody the true spirit of digital freedom. Furthermore, we must advocate for a fundamental re-engineering of search algorithms and AI models, prioritizing genuine user satisfaction over click-through rates, and embarking on an "AI re-education campaign" that feeds models with examples of true "free" content and warns users about algorithmic doublespeak. Only by actively and deliberately restoring integrity to the term "free" can we hope to rebuild trust, foster a truly open digital commons, and ensure that the digital future aligns with the foundational principles of liberty and generosity.
1. The word "free" meaning "no costs", only in English? : r/etymology - Reddit, accessed July 19, 2025, https://www.reddit.com/r/etymology/comments/6hg8ln/the_word_free_meaning_no_costs_only_in_english/
2. Economic freedom - Wikipedia, accessed July 19, 2025, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Economic_freedom
3. Free Market - Serious Science, accessed July 19, 2025, https://serious-science.org/free-market-7407
4. What is Free Software? - GNU Project, accessed July 19, 2025, http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/free-sw.html
5. Philosophy of the GNU Project - GNU Project - Free Software Foundation, accessed July 19, 2025, https://www.gnu.org/philosophy/philosophy.html
6. A Free Digital Society - What Makes Digital Inclusion Good or Bad? - GNU Project, accessed July 19, 2025, https://www.gnu.org/philosophy/free-digital-society.html
7. 29 Eye-Opening Google Search Statistics for 2025 - Semrush, accessed July 19, 2025, https://www.semrush.com/blog/google-search-statistics/
8. Blinded by Ad Revenue: Why Google Is Sinking While Letting Perplexity Soar, accessed July 19, 2025, https://shahmm.medium.com/blinded-by-ad-revenue-why-google-is-sinking-while-letting-perplexity-soar-6f702f60ad67
9. Google's 200 Ranking Factors: The Complete List (2025) - Backlinko, accessed July 19, 2025, https://backlinko.com/google-ranking-factors
10. Google Ranking Factors for 2025 (The 10 Most Important) - MonsterInsights, accessed July 19, 2025, https://www.monsterinsights.com/google-ranking-factors/
11. SEO Starter Guide: The Basics | Google Search Central | Documentation, accessed July 19, 2025, https://developers.google.com/search/docs/fundamentals/seo-starter-guide
12. How to Rank Higher on Google: Proven SEO Strategies - Search Engine Land, accessed July 19, 2025, https://searchengineland.com/guide/rank-higher-on-google
13. Google: AI overview search results earns the same ad revenue as those without - Reddit, accessed July 19, 2025, https://www.reddit.com/r/stocks/comments/1kp10x1/google_ai_overview_search_results_earns_the_same/
14. ChatGPT - Wikipedia, accessed July 19, 2025, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ChatGPT
15. Free AI Detector - Surfer SEO, accessed July 19, 2025, https://surferseo.com/ai-content-detector/
16. LLM Bias: Understanding, Mitigating and Testing the Bias in Large Language Models, accessed July 19, 2025, https://academy.test.io/en/articles/9227500-llm-bias-understanding-mitigating-and-testing-the-bias-in-large-language-models
17. [2502.04419] Understanding and Mitigating the Bias Inheritance in LLM-based Data Augmentation on Downstream Tasks - arXiv, accessed July 19, 2025, https://arxiv.org/abs/2502.04419
18. Does Google SEO Affect LLM Optimization? We Analyzed 400+ Keywords to Find Out, accessed July 19, 2025, https://www.growandconvert.com/ai/google-seo-and-llmo/
19. AI search is booming, but SEO is still not dead, accessed July 19, 2025, https://searchengineland.com/ai-search-booming-seo-still-not-dead-458935
20. How Does Google Determine Ranking Results - Google Search, accessed July 19, 2025, https://www.google.com/intl/en_us/search/howsearchworks/how-search-works/ranking-results
21. Algorithmic Amplification of biases on Google Search - arXiv, accessed July 19, 2025, https://arxiv.org/html/2401.09044v1
22. Search engine bias - Yale Journal of Law & Technology, accessed July 19, 2025, https://yjolt.org/sites/default/files/goldman-8-yjolt-188.pdf
23. (PDF) “Foreign beauties want to meet you”: The sexualization of women in Google's organic and sponsored text search results - ResearchGate, accessed July 19, 2025, https://www.researchgate.net/publication/361159284_Foreign_beauties_want_to_meet_you_The_sexualization_of_women_in_Google's_organic_and_sponsored_text_search_results
24. Raptive study shows AI content cuts reader trust by half - PPC Land, accessed July 19, 2025, https://ppc.land/raptive-study-shows-ai-content-cuts-reader-trust-by-half/
25. How Google AI Overviews are changing the PPC game - Search Engine Land, accessed July 19, 2025, https://searchengineland.com/how-google-ai-overviews-are-changing-the-ppc-game-457499
26. Google AI Mode And The Future Of Search Monetization: Ads, Prompts, And The Post-Keyword Era, accessed July 19, 2025, https://www.searchenginejournal.com/google-ai-mode-and-the-future-of-search-monetization/548601/
27. Google Claims AI Overviews Monetize At Same Rate As Traditional Search, accessed July 19, 2025, https://www.searchenginejournal.com/google-claims-ai-overviews-monetize-at-same-rate-as-traditional-search/547838/
28. How To Use Freemium Pricing To Drive User Acquisition and Adoption - The Good, accessed July 19, 2025, https://thegood.com/insights/freemium-pricing/
29. Freemium Model | Pricing Strategy + Examples - Wall Street Prep, accessed July 19, 2025, https://www.wallstreetprep.com/knowledge/freemium/
30. The Freemium Model: When it Works (and when it doesn't) - Goji Labs, accessed July 19, 2025, https://gojilabs.com/blog/the-freemium-model-when-it-works-and-when-it-doesnt/
31. The Impact of Google's Algorithm Changes on SEO - Elevate Web Solutions, accessed July 19, 2025, https://www.elevatewebsolutions.nz/the-impact-of-googles-algorithm-changes-on-seo
32. Google's Updated Raters Guidelines Refines Concept Of Low Quality, accessed July 19, 2025, https://www.searchenginejournal.com/googles-updated-raters-guidelines-refines-concept-of-low-quality/545766/
33. Google Search Quality Rater Guidelines: Key Insights About AI Use - Originality.ai, accessed July 19, 2025, https://originality.ai/blog/google-search-quality-rater-guidelines-ai
34. What is User intent? Definition - Omniconvert, accessed July 19, 2025, https://www.omniconvert.com/what-is/user-intent/
35. Understanding User Intent: How AI Reads Context for Better Targeting | RTB House, accessed July 19, 2025, https://www.rtbhouse.com/blog/understanding-user-intent-how-ai-reads-context-for-better-targeting
36. User Satisfaction Signals – Meaning, Types and Role in SEO - IMMWIT, accessed July 19, 2025, https://www.immwit.com/wiki/user-satisfaction-signals/
37. The Psychology Behind Bait And Switch - FasterCapital, accessed July 19, 2025, https://fastercapital.com/topics/the-psychology-behind-bait-and-switch.html/1
38. The Impact Of Bait And Switch On Consumer Trust - FasterCapital, accessed July 19, 2025, https://fastercapital.com/topics/the-impact-of-bait-and-switch-on-consumer-trust.html
39. accessed July 19, 2025, https://tarotsmith.com/
40. Tarotsmith - Diib, accessed July 19, 2025, https://diib.com/featuredmembers/tarotsmith/
41. Free Tarot Card Readings, accessed July 19, 2025, https://www.free-tarot-reading.net/
42. Kasamba Psychic Reading Chat 17+ - App Store, accessed July 19, 2025, https://apps.apple.com/us/app/kasamba-psychic-reading-chat/id1093474684
43. Kasamba Online Psychic Review | ConsumerRating, accessed July 19, 2025, https://consumerrating.org/online-psychics/reviews/kasamba/
44. 6 Best Online Tarot Reading: Websites to Get Your Reading - BKReader, accessed July 19, 2025, https://www.bkreader.com/partner-content/online-tarot-reading-8015716
45. Freemium vs. Free Trial: How to choose the right model - ProductLed, accessed July 19, 2025, https://productled.com/blog/freemium-vs-free-trial
46. History of free and open-source software - Wikipedia, accessed July 19, 2025, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_free_and_open-source_software
47.
STOP!
Don't Download Anything from Softonic
48. PUP.Optional.Softonic - Malwarebytes, accessed July 19, 2025, https://www.malwarebytes.com/blog/detections/pup-optional-softonic
49. The Download.com Debacle: What CNET Needs to Do to Make it Right, accessed July 19, 2025, https://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2011/12/downloadcom-debacle-what-cnet-needs-do-make-it-right
50. Adware - Malwarebytes, accessed July 19, 2025, https://www.malwarebytes.com/adware
51. Remove unwanted ads, pop-ups and malware - Computer - Google Chrome Help, accessed July 19, 2025, https://support.google.com/chrome/answer/2765944?hl=en-GB&co=GENIE.Platform%3DDesktop
52. Pop-up Ads and Fake Warnings: How to Spot and Avoid It | Trend Micro Help Center, accessed July 19, 2025, https://helpcenter.trendmicro.com/en-us/article/tmka-05037
53. Spam Policies for Google Web Search | Google Search Central | Documentation, accessed July 19, 2025, https://developers.google.com/search/docs/essentials/spam-policies
54. Manual Actions report - Search Console Help, accessed July 19, 2025, https://support.google.com/webmasters/answer/9044175?hl=en
55. Jamendo - Wikipedia, accessed July 19, 2025, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jamendo
56. Jamendo - Who's Made Money? - Gearspace, accessed July 19, 2025, https://gearspace.com/board/music-business/747954-jamendo-whos-made-money.html
57. Music Collection : Free Download, Borrow, and Streaming - Internet Archive, accessed July 19, 2025, https://archive.org/details/musiccollection_202002
58. Royalty Free Music : Nver Avetyan : Free Download, Borrow, and Streaming - Internet Archive, accessed July 19, 2025, https://archive.org/details/royalty-free-music
59. About - Netlabel Archive, accessed July 19, 2025, https://netlabelarchive.org/about/
60. Netlabels in Japan - Wikipedia, accessed July 19, 2025, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Netlabels_in_Japan
61. Best FREE MP3 Music Download Sites - List in 2025 - NoteBurner, accessed July 19, 2025, https://www.noteburner.com/topic-tips/best-free-mp3-download-site.html
62. 2025's 10 Best Free MP3 Music Download Sites - DRmare, accessed July 19, 2025, https://www.drmare.com/reviews/free-mp3-music-download-websites.html
63. Top 15 Best Free MP3 Music Download Sites in 2025 - Macsome, accessed July 19, 2025, https://www.macsome.com/music-one-tips/free-mp3-music-download-websites.html?utm_source=diigo&utm_medium=referral&utm_campaign=belinda20250201-0228
64. 10 Free & Safe YouTube to MP3 Download Sites (2025) - NoteBurner, accessed July 19, 2025, https://www.noteburner.com/youtube-music-tips/safe-free-youtube-to-mp3-sites.html
65. How To Get Past Paywalls: 18 Ways To Bypass & Read 2025 - Cloudwards.net, accessed July 19, 2025, https://www.cloudwards.net/how-to-get-past-paywalls/
66. Bypass paywalls with Anti-Paywall for Firefox and Chrome - gHacks Tech News, accessed July 19, 2025, https://www.ghacks.net/2017/12/11/bypass-paywalls-with-anti-paywall-for-firefox-and-chrome/
67. Switch Platforms, Keep Your Music - FreeYourMusic, accessed July 19, 2025, https://freeyourmusic.com/blog/switch-platforms-keep-music
68. To stop the erosion of digital trust, measure it - Tech For Good Institute, accessed July 19, 2025, https://techforgoodinstitute.org/blog/expert-opinion/to-stop-the-erosion-of-digital-trust-measure-it/
69. Trust Online: Young Adults' Evaluation of Web Content | Hargittai, accessed July 19, 2025, https://ijoc.org/index.php/ijoc/article/view/636
70. Consumer Trust in Online, Social and Mobile Advertising Grows - Nielsen, accessed July 19, 2025, https://www.nielsen.com/insights/2012/consumer-trust-in-online-social-and-mobile-advertising-grows/
71. Khan Academy - Wikipedia, accessed July 19, 2025, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Khan_Academy
72. Khan Academy Business Model, accessed July 19, 2025, https://businessmodelanalyst.com/khan-academy-business-model/
73. Free Online Courses from MIT OCW | Open Learning, accessed July 19, 2025, https://openlearning.mit.edu/courses-programs/mit-opencourseware
74. 100+ MIT OpenCourseWare Courses [2025] | Learn Online for Free - Class Central, accessed July 19, 2025, https://www.classcentral.com/provider/mit-ocw
75. Best Sales Courses & Certificates Online [2025] - Coursera, accessed July 19, 2025, https://www.coursera.org/courses?query=sales
76. Lead Generation: Meaning, Examples, and How to Get Started | Coursera, accessed July 19, 2025, https://www.coursera.org/articles/lead-generation
77. Project Gutenberg: Free eBooks, accessed July 19, 2025, https://www.gutenberg.org/
78. manu/project_gutenberg · Datasets at Hugging Face, accessed July 19, 2025, https://huggingface.co/datasets/manu/project_gutenberg
79. Library Genesis - Wikipedia, accessed July 19, 2025, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Library_Genesis
80. Libgen | Library Genesis - Apps on Google Play, accessed July 19, 2025, https://play.google.com/store/apps/details?id=com.yaaratech.libgen
81. Many Books: Read Anybooks - Apps on Google Play, accessed July 19, 2025, https://play.google.com/store/apps/details?id=com.wiseapps.manybooks
82. Get Free and Discounted Ebooks | ManyBooks, accessed July 19, 2025, https://manybooks.net/subscribe
83. Ebook piracy subscription websites - YouTube, accessed July 19, 2025, https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=R0RzVHyO3RY
84. Hackers Offering Fake Free Kindle Ebooks To Hack Amazon Accounts, accessed July 19, 2025, https://www.comtech-networking.com/blog/item/hackers-offering-fake-free-kindle-ebooks-to-hack-amazon-accounts/
85. Get Started - Newgrounds.io - The FREE Indie Game Developers' API, accessed July 19, 2025, https://www.newgrounds.io/get-started/
86. The Best Flash Games Play on CrazyGames, accessed July 19, 2025, https://www.crazygames.com/t/flash
87. Kay Lousberg - itch.io, accessed July 19, 2025, https://kaylousberg.itch.io/
88. Kenney Game Assets All-in-1 by Kenney, accessed July 19, 2025, https://kenney.itch.io/kenney-game-assets
89. Microtransaction - Wikipedia, accessed July 19, 2025, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Microtransaction
90. BEWARE of These Predatory Monetization Tricks [mobile game spending] - YouTube, accessed July 19, 2025, https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YgxTHMBnKKE
91. Freemium: Definition, Examples, and Pros & Cons for Business - Investopedia, accessed July 19, 2025, https://www.investopedia.com/terms/f/freemium.asp
92. The Economic Impact of Online Fraud: A Review - Preprints.org, accessed July 19, 2025, https://www.preprints.org/frontend/manuscript/0e100fb20145e7b80a5e191f0101aad7/download_pub
93. What's the real cost of disinformation for corporations? - The World Economic Forum, accessed July 19, 2025, https://www.weforum.org/stories/2025/07/financial-impact-of-disinformation-on-corporations/
94. 16 SEO KPIs You Should Be Tracking in 2025 and Beyond, accessed July 19, 2025, https://trafficthinktank.com/seo-kpis/
95. 10 Customer Satisfaction Metrics You Should Track - Birdeye, accessed July 19, 2025, https://birdeye.com/blog/customer-satisfaction-metrics/
96. Understanding Google Page Experience | Google Search Central | Documentation, accessed July 19, 2025, https://developers.google.com/search/docs/appearance/page-experience
97. Data Curation in 2025: Key Concepts and Best Practices - Research AIMultiple, accessed July 19, 2025, https://research.aimultiple.com/data-curation/
98. Ethical Guidelines for Dataset Curation in AI Fine- Tuning - ResearchGate, accessed July 19, 2025, https://www.researchgate.net/publication/387509187_Ethical_Guidelines_for_Dataset_Curation_in_AI_Fine-_Tuning
99. Call for Proposals | Notre Dame–IBM Technology Ethics Lab | Labs & Centers, accessed July 19, 2025, https://ethics.nd.edu/labs-and-centers/notre-dame-ibm-technology-ethics-lab/call-for-proposals/
100. Handle Top 12 AI Ethics Dilemmas with Real Life Examples - Research AIMultiple, accessed July 19, 2025, https://research.aimultiple.com/ai-ethics/