Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Addressing Antigravity Bans and Reinstating Access

github.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

11–20 of 230 posts

Re: Addressing Antigravity Bans and Reinstating Access

#11

Post by gman83 »

koolba wrote: post #8

Way too risky to use Google services like this tied to your primary account. There’s too much risk of cross damage. Imagine losing access to your Gmail because some Gemini request flags you as an undesirable. The digital death sentence of losing access to your email with a company that notoriously has no way for the average human to contact a human is not worth the risk.

This wasn't due to some random Gemini request. Users were using sketchy antigravity auth plugins to use their antigravity tokens on things like OpenClaw, clearly against ToS. It's great that Google is giving these users a second chance.

Re: Addressing Antigravity Bans and Reinstating Access

#12

Post by johnebgd »

gman83 wrote: post #11
koolba wrote: post #8

Way too risky to use Google services like this tied to your primary account. There’s too much risk of cross damage. Imagine losing access to your Gmail because some Gemini request flags you as an undesirable. The digital death sentence of losing access to your email with a company that notoriously has no way for the average human to contact a human is not worth the risk.

This wasn't due to some random Gemini request. Users were using sketchy antigravity auth plugins to use their antigravity tokens on things like OpenClaw, clearly against ToS. It's great that Google is giving these users a second chance.

It’s be great if Google just revoked antigravity access if terms were violated. No need to disable the entire account.

Re: Addressing Antigravity Bans and Reinstating Access

#14

Post by crawshaw »

gman83 wrote: post #11
koolba wrote: post #8

Way too risky to use Google services like this tied to your primary account. There’s too much risk of cross damage. Imagine losing access to your Gmail because some Gemini request flags you as an undesirable. The digital death sentence of losing access to your email with a company that notoriously has no way for the average human to contact a human is not worth the risk.

This wasn't due to some random Gemini request. Users were using sketchy antigravity auth plugins to use their antigravity tokens on things like OpenClaw, clearly against ToS. It's great that Google is giving these users a second chance.

The concern is not losing access to some new IDE for operating outside the terms of service. The concern is when you lose access to the IDE, you also lose access to your 20 year old Gmail account.

A general problem for Google products is that everything is mixed together.

Re: Addressing Antigravity Bans and Reinstating Access

#15

Post by amiga386 »

gman83 wrote: post #11
koolba wrote: post #8

Way too risky to use Google services like this tied to your primary account. There’s too much risk of cross damage. Imagine losing access to your Gmail because some Gemini request flags you as an undesirable. The digital death sentence of losing access to your email with a company that notoriously has no way for the average human to contact a human is not worth the risk.

This wasn't due to some random Gemini request. Users were using sketchy antigravity auth plugins to use their antigravity tokens on things like OpenClaw, clearly against ToS. It's great that Google is giving these users a second chance.

Yes, our masters once again embarrass us unworthy peons with their endless grace, generosity and forebearance. How lucky we are to entrust our data and our lives to them!

Re: Addressing Antigravity Bans and Reinstating Access

#16

Post by dangus »

johnebgd wrote: post #12
gman83 wrote: post #11

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This wasn't due to some random Gemini request. Users were using sketchy antigravity auth plugins to use their antigravity tokens on things like OpenClaw, clearly against ToS. It's great that Google is giving these users a second chance.

It’s be great if Google just revoked antigravity access if terms were violated. No need to disable the entire account.

I’ll go further: there should be laws addressing account consolidation. Getting banned from an Apple or Google account is an incredibly wide blast radius. It would be like being banned from buying Unilever or Nestle food from your grocery store.

Re: Addressing Antigravity Bans and Reinstating Access

#18

Post by zarzavat »

gman83 wrote: post #11
koolba wrote: post #8

Way too risky to use Google services like this tied to your primary account. There’s too much risk of cross damage. Imagine losing access to your Gmail because some Gemini request flags you as an undesirable. The digital death sentence of losing access to your email with a company that notoriously has no way for the average human to contact a human is not worth the risk.

This wasn't due to some random Gemini request. Users were using sketchy antigravity auth plugins to use their antigravity tokens on things like OpenClaw, clearly against ToS. It's great that Google is giving these users a second chance.

Okay but they were paying customers paying $$$ for the service. Banning your customers without prior warning is not right, however sketchy their behaviour might appear. Even if it's obvious to Google that there's a difference between a Gemini API key and an Antigravity API key, it's not necessarily obvious to others.

The correct and sane thing to do is to send them an email, with at most a 24 hour suspension. If they keep doing it despite being warned then by all means fire them.

Re: Addressing Antigravity Bans and Reinstating Access

#19

Post by exitb »

gman83 wrote: post #11
koolba wrote: post #8

Way too risky to use Google services like this tied to your primary account. There’s too much risk of cross damage. Imagine losing access to your Gmail because some Gemini request flags you as an undesirable. The digital death sentence of losing access to your email with a company that notoriously has no way for the average human to contact a human is not worth the risk.

This wasn't due to some random Gemini request. Users were using sketchy antigravity auth plugins to use their antigravity tokens on things like OpenClaw, clearly against ToS. It's great that Google is giving these users a second chance.

If a 3rd party product advertises compatibility with a Google service and you use it to login via a first party Google login page, doesn’t the responsibility fall somewhere between the offending product and Google itself? In practice it’s structured pretty much like a phishing attempt.

Notably some model providers explicitly allow that very flow, while others will ban you without notice.

Re: Addressing Antigravity Bans and Reinstating Access

#20

Post by falcor84 »

NitpickLawyer wrote: post #10
jascha_eng wrote: post #5

I still kinda wish that the subscriptions would just allow you to use the tokens however you wish. I get that they rely on people not using all of their quota. But e.g. with open code it doesn't really matter if I use antigravity or gemini-cli the usage should be about the same. What they are actually trying to force you to do is to pay for the tokens that you don't use in their applications to increase their revenue…

> I get that they rely on people not using all of their quota They have no problem with users using their quota on their own software. Because they get the signals. They do have a problem with users using the API in 3rd party software, because they don't get the signals.

Well ... the clear signal is that people want to use Google's models but not Google products
Post reply on HN