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

Google restricting Google AI Pro/Ultra subscribers for using OpenClaw

discuss.ai.google.dev

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

121–130 of 752 posts

Re: Google restricting Google AI Pro/Ultra subscribers for using OpenClaw

#121

Post by jacquesm »

gjsman-1000 wrote: post #33
cogman10 wrote: post #29

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You can call the ToS draconian, yes. Just because something is in the ToS doesn't mean it's reasonable.

Why is it unreasonable? It’s a subsidized price; conditional to using their tooling. Don’t want to use their tooling? Pay the API rates. The API is sitting right there, ready to use for a broader range of purposes. It’s only unreasonable if you think the customer has a right to have their cake and eat it too.

> It’s a subsidized price; conditional to using their tooling.

Yes, because you are giving them your data. So you're not actually paying for usage. What they should do instead is be upfront about why this is subsidized and/or not subsidize it in the first place.

Re: Google restricting Google AI Pro/Ultra subscribers for using OpenClaw

#122

Post by qmarchi »

londons_explore wrote: post #71
blibble wrote: post #64

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> A while back I made completely separate Google accounts for YouTube and Maps just so my longstanding Gmail account wouldn't get banned if the system somehow detected that my Youtube account for example breached Google's TOS. I bet you that if they ban one they ban the other too the only safe way is to get your important data out of Google entirely after manifest v3's announcement, I de-googled: gmail, chrome, searc…

Linked bans pretty much only happen if you use the same recovery phone number or email address. Other ways of linking an account, such as having both logged in on the same phone, don't put you at risk.

Disclaimer: Former Googler

Yeah they do. There's an entire mesh of metrics that are used to calculate your relation to separate accounts.

It's the confidence tolerance that keeps you and your partner from getting banned together.

Re: Google restricting Google AI Pro/Ultra subscribers for using OpenClaw

#123

Post by jacquesm »

qmarchi wrote: post #122
londons_explore wrote: post #71

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Linked bans pretty much only happen if you use the same recovery phone number or email address. Other ways of linking an account, such as having both logged in on the same phone, don't put you at risk.

Disclaimer: Former Googler Yeah they do. There's an entire mesh of metrics that are used to calculate your relation to separate accounts. It's the confidence tolerance that keeps you and your partner from getting banned together.

> There's an entire mesh of metrics that are used to calculate your relation to separate accounts.

> It's the confidence tolerance that keeps you and your partner from getting banned together.

Thanks for that bit of info, the degree of disgusting that google would be tracking who people's partners are is off the scale invasive and should be a reason for an immediate complaint to the various data privacy authorities.

Re: Google restricting Google AI Pro/Ultra subscribers for using OpenClaw

#124

Post by usef- »

fruitworks wrote: post #100
gjsman-1000 wrote: post #44

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yes; because they have no obligation to provide this service tier at all. It could be API prices for anyone, everywhere. They offer a discounted plan, $200/mo., for a restricted set of use cases. Abuse that at your peril. It’s like complaining your phone’s unlimited data plan is insufficient to run an apartment building with all units. I was told it was Unlimited! That means I can totally run 500 units through it if…

You can run an entire apartment block off of a single sim card/phone line. The (technical) problem is that you are purchasing an insufficient amount of bandwidth. It goes without saying that a limited bandwidth integrated over a finite service period comes out to a limited amount of data, so the term is misleading. If google has no obligation to provide the service tier, then they should stop providing it instead of…

I don't think that's an apt metaphor. You bought one general water supply, like an API user. If they sold a "no baths" cheaper option I'd be fine with them banning baths to those customers.

Google's API does let you use any client.

The gemini/antigravity clients are a different (subscription) service. When you reverse engineer the clients and use their internal auth/apis you will typically have very different access patterns to other clients (eg: not using prompt caching), and this is likely showing up in their metrics.

This isn't unusual. A bottomless drink at a restaurant has restrictions: it's for you to drink, not to pass around to others at the table (unless they buy one too). You can't pour it into bottles to take large quantities home, etc. And it's priced accordingly: if sharing/bottling was allowed the price would have to increase.

Re: Google restricting Google AI Pro/Ultra subscribers for using OpenClaw

#125

Post by martinald »

obblekk wrote: post #111

This is the first time in recent memory that software has had high variable costs so the surprise at these rules is understandable. In this case, a the difference in context cache hit rate between openclaw and antigravity. For example if openclaw starts every message with the current time hh:mm:ss at the top of the context window, followed by the full convo history, it would have a cache hit rate if ~0. Simply moving…

It's a fair point, but I think people are thinking too much about 'cost' and 'subsidies' and just the fact that everyone is so compute stretched.

While it's sort of the same thing, I think it's much more a symptom of not enough compute vs some 'dump cheap tokens' on the market strategy.

One related thought I had was that given OpenAI is the only one _not_ doing this of the big3, it probably indicates they have a lot more spare compute.

It doesn't make sense to me that given the absolutely brutal competition any of these companies would block use of 3rd party apps unless they had to. They clearly have enough cash, so I don't think it's about money - I think it's that an indicator that Google and Anthropic are really struggling with keeping up with demand. Given Anthropics reliability issues last week this does not surprise me.

Re: Google restricting Google AI Pro/Ultra subscribers for using OpenClaw

#126

Post by _pdp_ »

While the frustration is understandable I don't see any difference between this and Netflix not allowing you to use your Netflix subscription in Amazon Prime federated video hub or something of that sort.

At the end of the day we know that these tools are massively subsidised and they do not reflect the real cost of usage. It is a fair-use model at best and the goal is to capture as market share as possible.

I am a no defender of Google and I've been burned many times by Google as well but I kind of get it?

That being said, you don't really need to use your gemini subscription in openclaw. You can use gemini directly the way it was intended and rip the benefits of the subsidised plan.

I developed an open source tool called Pantalk which sits as a background daemon and exposes many of the communication channels you want as a standard CLI which gemini can use directly. All you need is just some SKILL.md files to describe where things are at and you are good to go. You have openclaw without openclaw and still within TOS.

The project is hosted at: https://github.com/pantalk/pantalk

Re: Google restricting Google AI Pro/Ultra subscribers for using OpenClaw

#127

Post by martinald »

alexandre_m wrote: post #85

It should be obvious that these services are operating at a loss. The monthly subscriptions especially, but I’m even skeptical that the linear API pricing is sustainable. It feels like a classic “drug dealer” model to me. Get everyone hooked with cheap access, then raise prices later. Unless there’s a major breakthrough in the underlying technology, I don’t see how a significant price increase isn’t inevitable once a…

This seems unlikely while we have open weights models available that are ~as decent as the frontier ones.

Given the API prices for open weights models of similar size are 5-10x less than the frontier models the APIs are very profitable on a pure unit economics approach. I strongly suspect they make money off their monthly plans as well.

Re: Google restricting Google AI Pro/Ultra subscribers for using OpenClaw

#129

Post by NewsaHackO »

jacquesm wrote: post #120
torginus wrote: post #107

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Isn't the reason companies are doing this because they're offering tokens at a discount, provided they're spent through their tooling? Considering the tremendous amount of tokens OpenClaw can burn for something that has nothing to do with sofware development, I think it's reasonable for Google to not allow using tokens reserved for Antigravity. I don't think there's such a restriction if you pay for the API out of po…

> Isn't the reason companies are doing this because they're offering tokens at a discount, provided they're spent through their tooling? Then maybe they should charge for that instead of banning accounts? Google decided on their own business plan without any guns to their backs. If they decide to create a plan that is subsidized that's entirely on them.

So the issue is the same as Anthropic. They do charge for it though their API. The users, however, want to use the discounted "unlimited" flat rate through the first-party app instead, then get mad when they are told they have to use the same API every other third-party app does.

Re: Google restricting Google AI Pro/Ultra subscribers for using OpenClaw

#130

Post by arcanemachiner »

fennecbutt wrote: post #114
SilverSlash wrote: post #77

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What's "tfa"?

You couldn't Google this? I mean, even ChatGPT is capable of doing that.

> TFA most commonly refers to Trifluoroacetic acid, a highly persistent, mobile "forever chemical" (PFAS) found globally in water and soil, widely used in organic chemistry as a solvent.
Post reply on HN