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

241–250 of 752 posts

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

#241

Post by gck1 »

hsuduebc2 wrote: post #237
adithyassekhar wrote: post #222

Edit: I have misread some of the comments here, he didn't lose access to his whole account and data just the antigravity part. I should've done my due diligence, get out of bed and spent more time thinking instead of emotionally reacting. Guess the rage machine got me as well. Damn. I think this thread might be hijacked by ai bros. The main point still stands, google is part of a duopoly that runs the world. You can'…

This is a serious problem. I think the only durable solution is legislation that requires these companies to provide access to your data, or at least a way to export or transfer it, even after an account ban. Otherwise, if they delete your account for any reason, even for a legitimate policy violation, they can effectively cut you off from information you have built up and stored over years. In Apple’s case, an accou…

Google does give you a way to export data partially if your account is banned.

But that's still not enough. I can't easily reconstruct this data in a way that will be usable to me, not without having something like Gemini build a UI for me. Oh wait.

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

#242

Post by DANmode »

Rostik312 wrote: post #179

Wow, and I was complaining about Anthropic handling their comms. For almost a trillion-dollar company, this is the worst customer experience I've ever seen. Departments sending poor guy to each other like a hot potato. Huge aura loss.

Pitting departments against each other isn’t for the consumers!

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

#243

Post by hackit2 »

hapticmonkey wrote: post #198
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…

Did people learn nothing from the rise, stall, and now fall of social networks? Yes, AI can do some incredible things. But we’re also running full speed into an ecosystem controlled by 2 or 3 major companies. Running at a loss. A reality check is coming. It’s not a technology problem. It’s an economic problem. People are too busy looking at the tech to notice.

I'm not concerned, they're accelerating research and development into hardware and more optimal models. People forget that you can locally host some of the early models quantized to 4 with reasonable inference with a 4080 and 64gb of ram. There are daily tools being released that are a simple click and run, without much hassle other than downloading the model and you're off and running.

Yes there is mad dash by Google, Oracle, Microsoft, Meta, and China not to cede their position to each other - it actually isn't about who will buy or pay for the service its more of a Business Strategic position to obtain critical mass in a new market using their massive reserve of cash. The users right now are insignificant to their goal - they probably aren't even given a second thought.

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

#244

Post by throwaway13337 »

These companies are engaged in a sort of AI dumping. Cheap inference below cost.

Price out competitors. Abuse your newfound dominance.

It's the big tech playbook.

I don't think it's going to work this time.

Tools like OpenClaw are an existential threat precisely because it allows the user control over their experience. The value in it cannot be captured by a monopoly.

LLMs don't seem to be a very good moat. At the same time, the software moat is eroding due to those same LLMs.

Telecom tech killed telecom dominance.

With some luck, Google tech will kill Google dominance.

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

#245

Post by hsaliak »

Google's Pro service (no idea about ultra and I have no intention to find out) is riddled with 429s. They have generous quotas for sure, but they really give you very low priority. For example, I still dont have access to Gemini 3.1 from that endpoint. It's completely uncharacteristic of Google.

I analyzed 6k HTTP requests on the Pro account, 23% of those were hit with 429s. (Though not from Gemini-CLI, but from my own agent using code assist). The gemini-cli has a default retry backoff of 5s. That's verifiable in code, and it's a lot.

I dont touch the anti-gravity endpoint, unlike code-assist, it's clear that they are subsidizing that for user acquisition on that tool. So perhaps it's ok for them to ban users form it.

I like their models, but they also degrade. It's quite easy to see when the models are 'smart' and capacity is available, and when they are 'stupid'. They likely clamp thinking when they are capacity strapped.

Yes the models are smart, but you really cant "build things" despite the marketing if you actively beat back your users for trying. I spent a decade at Google, and it's sad to see how they are executing here, despite having solid models in gemini-3-flash and gemini-3.1

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

#247

Post by jacquesm »

cyberax wrote: post #185
NewsaHackO wrote: post #145

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Essentially these are unfair business practices, product cross subsidization to ensure market dominance. Offering a different discounted rate for a service, though their first-party platform is not an unfair business practice whatsoever, though. The bar isn't what you disagree with, or what you think their motives are without any substantial proof. They could even make a honest argument that they can aggressively k…

Offering goods or services below the cost of their production is often illegal, though. It's called "dumping". Although in this case it's probably impossible to define, given the complexity of calculating the true cost of tokens.

And in this case the subsidy is paid for by tied sales from other users that don't actually use the service, which is another illegal business practice.

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

#248

Post by sowbug »

overfeed wrote: post #207
sowbug wrote: post #109

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Businesses do not have an entitlement to profit. Suspending customers for using a fairly expensive subscription plan -- especially forfeiting an annual prepayment for a day or two of coloring outside the lines -- sure does make Google appear entitled to profit without ever risking its own pricing model.

Equally, customers are not entitled to make set the terms, or pricing decisions for businesses. They can always move their custom elsewhere if they disagree with ToS or pricing.

Of course. That's why I personally don't use an ad blocker. I just close the tab if it's too annoying.

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

#249

Post by jacquesm »

joshuamorton wrote: post #174
jacquesm wrote: post #123

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> 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.

I think you're vastly misunderstanding that comment.

Thus spake the Googler... sorry, but I think I understand it just fine, I think it is you that is not understanding it properly but since your salary depends on not understanding it properly I won't blame you for that.

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

#250

Post by jacquesm »

carshodev wrote: post #144
jacquesm wrote: post #133

Earlier quoted context omitted.

No, the problem is that the discounted rate exists in the first place. Essentially these are unfair business practices, product cross subsidization to ensure market dominance. See also: Microsoft and a whole bunch of other companies. And once they've got their monopoly position there is inevitably the rug-pull. I wonder if some CPO somewhere actually had the guts to put a 'rug pull' item on the product roadmap.

It's not unfair its how every business works. When your product is new or not yet good enough and you want people to try it you give them discounts, or if you want to drive traffic to your service you also do the same. Even traditional businesses do this with coupons. Is it unfair that Costco sells chickens for under cost because it drives usage to them? Companies like Uber did use massive funding and price subsidiza…

> It's not unfair its how every business works.

Not. On both counts.

Post reply on HN