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

211–220 of 230 posts

Re: Addressing Antigravity Bans and Reinstating Access

#211

Post by mikkupikku »

amiga386 wrote: post #15
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.

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!

It's easy to sneer at huge corps getting mildly scammed by people stretching or breaking the rules. Certainly I don't shed any tears for these corporations.

On the other hand, I have learned that people who are willing to find exploits with trust-based systems operated by huge corps are very often willing to apply that same cheating and exploitation mentality without regard for who the other party is. These are very often the same people who try to coerce teenage cashiers at locally owned shops to accept expired coupons or combine them in invalid ways, or take produce from a roadside farm stand instead of paying into the honor jar. The mentality of cheating the system seems great when it's against huge inhumane corporations, but from what I've personally seen it rarely stops there, and on the whole it contributes to a low trust society.

Re: Addressing Antigravity Bans and Reinstating Access

#212

Post by fwn »

itake wrote: post #210
calcifer wrote: post #50

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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 switched to a password manager (bitwarden) about 7 years ago. I have over 200 accounts (not all of them use my @gmail). it would take me weeks to convert those accounts to a new domain, if the application could even support it. I will admit, many of the accounts are not needed any more. but the process will still be emotionally boring to filter through that.

> ... it would take me weeks to convert those accounts to a new domain ...

I did the same with about the same amount of accounts and it took me the better part of a Saturday. Even if you were really slow and needed five minutes per account, 200 accounts would still only take about 17 hours.

I don't think that's a lot of effort. You could easily spend that time fixing something around the house or garden, which often might not have nearly as big of an impact on personal agency.

Re: Addressing Antigravity Bans and Reinstating Access

#213

Post by joshstrange »

raincole wrote: post #129
NewsaHackO wrote: post #123

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yea, there are the last to the party (have they even arrived?), so they are going to have to make some concessions. I wonder if they at rollout will have a third-party subscription token service in addition to their first-party one.

> there are the last to the party Anecdotally, I'm having a very hard time imagining there are more Gemini Cli users than Codex users.

There are a lot of people who have access to Gemini for “free” through Google workspace.

That said, I am unimpressed by Gemini CLI overall and even though I have 2 workspace accounts with access, I use neither.

Re: Addressing Antigravity Bans and Reinstating Access

#214

Post by cadamsdotcom »

aliljet wrote: post #45
tjoff wrote: 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...

I just migrated to Fastmail (on my domain), it’s fantastic. It works just like Gmail in every way I need, haven’t missed Gmail or Google Calendar one bit. It’s clearly made by people who know Gmail well and understand why it works the way it does. I thought it’d be a huge migration but it was actually boring. Search works, 20 years of emails just magically migrated over. Spam detection is better. Couldn’t be happier!

Accidentally typed gmail.com the other day, it took 4 seconds to load (Fastmail is instant) and when it finished loading there was an ad to try some paid Google service. Felt like a flashback to an abusive ex.

Re: Addressing Antigravity Bans and Reinstating Access

#215

Post by victorbjorklund »

itake wrote: post #210
calcifer wrote: post #50

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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 switched to a password manager (bitwarden) about 7 years ago. I have over 200 accounts (not all of them use my @gmail). it would take me weeks to convert those accounts to a new domain, if the application could even support it. I will admit, many of the accounts are not needed any more. but the process will still be emotionally boring to filter through that.

Just give access to clawdbot and let it change the emails for you /jk

Re: Addressing Antigravity Bans and Reinstating Access

#216

Post by Verdex »

In my mind Google is the one AI provider which is more or less guaranteed to make it past the next 2-5 years. Maybe anthropic and openai can be profitable with current model. But they'll never get to stop investing in next model while Google is there with infinite money.

So either scaling stops hard here pretty soon so that spending can stabilize or else the investors are going to be showing up asking for several pounds of flesh.

Suddenly 'dont get left behind, this is the worst these models will ever be' sounds a lot more like 'get locked in with a hyper giant that'll destroy your livelihood and not notice'.

Although who knows, maybe local models will be a thing (however when your dev team gets banned with no explanation and the next milestone is coming up somehow I don't expect that transition to go sufficiently quick).

Re: Addressing Antigravity Bans and Reinstating Access

#217

Post by StilesCrisis »

ph4rsikal wrote: post #188
oofbey wrote: post #39

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Ex googler here. It is based on Google’s fundamental disdain of customers. Googlers are repeatedly told by management that they are the smartest people in the world and that their time is too valuable to spend on silly things like helping customers.

I build AI for banks. A couple of weeks ago, I had a meeting with a Google team on Legacy Modernization using Agentic AI. Let me phrase it this way. None of them were smart. My team and I were shaking our heads at the low skills of the team. While this might have been true 20 years ago, I am sure there are pockets of smart people somewhere. But Google now employs 200K people worldwide. I am certain that it's hard to…

You can't pass the Google hiring screen and be _dumb_. But I'm 100% willing to believe that they had no knowledge of your domain whatsoever, because the Google hiring screen is also totally generic and doesn't hire for any domain knowledge beyond "general comp sci."

Re: Addressing Antigravity Bans and Reinstating Access

#218

Post by jllyhill »

calcifer wrote: post #50
aliljet wrote: 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…

Do you use single email address on your domain or multiple for different purposes? Or do you have one main address and throwaway aliases for the one-time registration purposes? I see that the Fastmail provides a single inbox that can handle multiple addresses and wonder how does it work.

Re: Addressing Antigravity Bans and Reinstating Access

#219

Post by DangitBobby »

NewsaHackO wrote: post #95
sneak wrote: post #89

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's their OAuth token, it's not being stolen. It's just being copied from one place on their computer to another. This is no different than a competing browser importing your localStorage and cookies from Chrome on first launch.

No, the OAuth token is supposed to be used solely with the context of a first-party app only. Clearly, if you need to extract the key by reverse engineering or set up a proxy to spoof requests to a service, you're doing something shady.

That's not what stealing is.

Re: Addressing Antigravity Bans and Reinstating Access

#220

Post by DangitBobby »

squeaky-clean wrote: post #167
sneak wrote: post #112

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> No, the OAuth token is supposed to be used solely with the context of a first-party app only. The web doesn't work like that. The operators of google.com saying you must only use Chrome to load it is a ridiculous concept. It's not spoofing to use your own access credentials on your own computer to access your own account on an HTTP API.

By this logic video game companies shouldn't be allowed to ban cheaters.

Most people would agree both that getting rid of cheating is desirable and that the methods of control exerted over users to accomplish it is questionable. It's one of the few freedom/security tradeoffs where people generally agree we have to come down on the side of authoritarian, because otherwise it destroys online gaming as a whole. That scenario doesn't apply here. The world is a complex place.
Post reply on HN