Live data from Hacker News

Addressing Antigravity Bans and Reinstating Access

github.com

141–150 of 230 posts

Re: Addressing Antigravity Bans and Reinstating Access

#142
post #49

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 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. This is almost as realistic as "I wish netflix or youtube allowed me to use VLC to watch their content".

Why is that unrealistic?

Think of it like the digital right-to-repair.

I pay for it, I get to use it with any client I want. Simple.

Re: Addressing Antigravity Bans and Reinstating Access

#143

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.

I turned off tracking on Antigravity. Do I deserve to get my account banned from a service I pay for now? Silly.

Re: Addressing Antigravity Bans and Reinstating Access

#144
post #126

Earlier quoted context omitted.

For the second time, yes. And it's still not clear at what point does a wrapper around claude cli running in headless mode become a 'product' that is going to get my account banned. My guess is, and others have said this as well in the thread: "when you start utilizing your weekly quotas fully". But obviously, they can't put "you can't use your weekly allocated quota fully". That would be way too honest and we can't…

No, the link clearly says that if you are not using the harness provided by Claude for the Agent SDK (such as for making tool calls), you have to use the Client SDK. So attempting to prompt the Agent SDK with a third-party app so that the third-party app can then call a tool with the output is not allowed in the Agent SDK. You have to use the Client SDK (API).It even gives an example in the section I asked you to rea…

> the link clearly says that if you are not using the harness provided by Claude for the Agent SDK (such as for making tool calls), you have to use the Client SDK

But you just made this up? There's no text on the page that says this. What the linked page does is explain technical differences between Agent SDK and Client SDK, and Agent SDK and cli (Agent SDK is just a wrapper around cli anyway).

Neither tab says anything remotely like "if a third-party app prompts the Agent SDK and uses the output for tool calls, that's not allowed." You entirely fabricated this from the comparisons.

And your assumption is wrong on another level. The Agent SDK specifically exists so that you can write your own harness and give it custom tools - that's its entire purpose. It's even documented in their custom tools guide [1]. So not only "using a third-party harness with the Agent SDK" isn't forbidden, it's the product's primary use case. There's no such thing as "harness provided by claude for the agent SDK" - you bring the harness.

The only policy statement on that page is this:

> Unless previously approved, Anthropic does not allow third party developers to offer claude.ai login or rate limits for their products..

But I've already addressed this, so it seems we're going in circles.

[1] https://platform.claude.com/docs/en/agent-sdk/custom-tools

Re: Addressing Antigravity Bans and Reinstating Access

#145
post #45
post #38

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Use a custom domain and don't use google for email. And if you do use your gmail address just forward it and start to transition to something else. With time everything of importance has been transferred.

How do you even pull away from a Gmail address? I'm nearly twenty years into that service. Getting banned would be absolutely devastating...

gmail uses IMAP.

make another mailbox (another provider - migadu, fastmail, proton, whoever) that has IMAP as well. (selfhosting.. is PITA. only if u really need it).

install some standalone mail-client - thunderbird, clawsmail, applemail, or k9 , aqua on android, whatever. Attach both mailboxes into that. Find out how to copy an e-mail from one folder into another.

Folder by folder, select all mails, copy from one mailbox into the other. Will take time.

(Beware, some clients (apple) will fuckup the mail-date, anything older than 5 years becomes 5 years old. or it shows like that. YMMV.)

i have made this multiple times, for 20+ years of mails...

Re: Addressing Antigravity Bans and Reinstating Access

#147
post #144

Earlier quoted context omitted.

No, the link clearly says that if you are not using the harness provided by Claude for the Agent SDK (such as for making tool calls), you have to use the Client SDK. So attempting to prompt the Agent SDK with a third-party app so that the third-party app can then call a tool with the output is not allowed in the Agent SDK. You have to use the Client SDK (API).It even gives an example in the section I asked you to rea…

> the link clearly says that if you are not using the harness provided by Claude for the Agent SDK (such as for making tool calls), you have to use the Client SDK But you just made this up? There's no text on the page that says this. What the linked page does is explain technical differences between Agent SDK and Client SDK, and Agent SDK and cli (Agent SDK is just a wrapper around cli anyway). Neither tab says anyth…

>And your assumption is wrong on another level. The Agent SDK specifically exists so that you can write your own harness and give it custom tools - that's its entire purpose. It's even documented in their custom tools guide [1].

Yea, you don't seem to even understand what you are writing. This in no way contradicts any statement I or Anthopic has said.

>Neither tab says anything remotely like "if a third-party app prompts the Agent SDK and uses the output for tool calls, that's not allowed." You entirely fabricated this from the comparisons.

From: https://platform.claude.com/docs/en/agent-sdk/overview#agent...

>The Anthropic Client SDK gives you direct API access: you send prompts and implement tool execution yourself. The Agent SDK gives you Claude with built-in tool execution.

>With the Client SDK, you implement a tool loop. With the Agent SDK, Claude handles it:

Python

  # Client SDK: You implement the tool loop
  response = client.messages.create(...)
  while response.stop_reason == "tool_use":
      result = your_tool_executor(response.tool_use)
      response = client.messages.create(tool_result=result, \*params)

  # Agent SDK: Claude handles tools autonomously
  async for message in query(prompt="Fix the bug in auth.py"):
      print(message)

At this point, it's clear that you either have questionable reading comprehension skills, are being willfully ignorant, or are arguing in bad faith because it even says that tool calls outside of the Agent SDK harness has to use the Client SDK as the comments to the code used in the examples.

Re: Addressing Antigravity Bans and Reinstating Access

#148
post #11
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.

They were banning people and those people couldn’t even cancel their subscription. That’s a rookie mistake and you expect the same company to have a flawless ban system?

Re: Addressing Antigravity Bans and Reinstating Access

#149
post #45

Earlier quoted context omitted.

How do you even pull away from a Gmail address? I'm nearly twenty years into that service. Getting banned would be absolutely devastating...

Use your own domain to sign up for a paid email service, provided by a company that focuses on email. I use Fastmail, but there are many other options. Set up forwarding in Gmail to your new address. Then, whenever you log in to a website or app with your Gmail, take a moment to change it to your new address. In a few weeks, most of your important accounts will be covered. In a few months, almost everything you still…

I did this but don't forward. Instead, every new email in Gmail I got would prompt me to go update that service's contact info for me.

It probably doesn't matter, but it made me feel a little better because that way Google wouldn't have direct info on to which email/domain I transfered (ignoring other Gmail contacts that start emailing me at my new address(es) ).

Re: Addressing Antigravity Bans and Reinstating Access

#150
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.

Using Gmail as your primary email has become a serious risk. Email was once a distinct thing but Google tying it to your everything-account makes gmail terrible.
Post reply on HN