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

361–370 of 752 posts

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

#361

Post by azuanrb »

BoorishBears wrote: post #360
adastra22 wrote: post #209

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The Claude Agent SDK is explicitly disallowed from subscription use, as of a few days ago.

No it's not. You can't offer OAuth + the Claude Agent SDK in your own product, but you can use Claude Agent SDK locally by signing in through Claude Code. It's no different than using Claude Code directly.

I’m aware of the tweet that says otherwise, but until they update their legal documentation, it’s still not allowed.

> OAuth authentication (used with Free, Pro, and Max plans) is intended exclusively for Claude Code and Claude.ai. Using OAuth tokens obtained through Claude Free, Pro, or Max accounts in any other product, tool, or service — including the Agent SDK — is not permitted and constitutes a violation of the Consumer Terms of Service.

https://code.claude.com/docs/en/legal-and-compliance#authent...

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

#362

Post by overgard »

bethekind wrote: post #15

This is draconian. > Our investigation specifically confirmed that the use of your credentials within the third-party tool “open claw” for testing purposes constitutes a violation of the Google Terms of Service [1]. This is due to the use of Antigravity servers to power a non-Antigravity product. I must be transparent and inform you that, in accordance with Google’s policy, this situation falls under a zero tolerance…

Yikes!! This is really unfortunate, because Google's models seem very good but there's no way I'm using a google service for this kind of thing with those policies. I don't even want to run OpenClaw, but that's scary! Plus, I have my google account tied to authenticating so many things that if my account were to be suspended or something that would be a nightmare.

I haven't tried Antigravity but I remember on release it had huge UX issues. Is this product just not ready for primetime?

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

#363

Post by roudaki »

Gigachad wrote: post #358
somenameforme wrote: post #352

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Wouldn't it be ironic if LLMs are what saves us all from our digital addictions? There's not much point in shit posting online if there's no confidence that the person you're talking to is even a person. I mean over time I'd imagine they'll be able to tune away from the 'LLM style' chat making it even more ambiguous who is human and who is not, and at which point, I expect many of us might be forced to accept what a…

It’s certainly a losing game. I’ve deleted most of my accounts these days. I think the future is just going to be people retreating in to instant messaging and small group chats where you have physically met the other people.

I guess now we know why there is no social media in Star wars or star Trek

It's kind of pointless in the world where it's easy to clone your way of talking and have thousands bots talking for you. It unavoidably turns into bots talking to bots

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

#364

Post by danpalmer »

gck1 wrote: post #282
danpalmer wrote: post #119

If you go to an all you can eat buffet, ignore the plates they give you, and start filling up your own takeaway boxes with days worth of food, you'd expect to be kicked out. No one would think this is unreasonable. You're not paying for unlimited food forever, you're paying for all you can eat in the restaurant right there.

I'm confused by this repeat analogy here. There's 0 offerings with all you can eat type of deal. No AI service is offering that. They all have amounts defined in their service agreements of how much you can eat and in what intervals.

Exactly. And yet that's what some people are doing, they're sneaking in their takeaway containers and getting stroppy at being banned.

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

#365

Post by JumpCrisscross »

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.

> Offering goods or services below the cost of their production is often illegal, though. It's called "dumping"

No.

Dumping is an international-trade term. It doesn’t even require pricing below cost, just aiming “to increase market share in a foreign market by driving out competition and thereby create a monopoly situation where the exporter will be able to unilaterally dictate price and quality of the product” [1].

Loss leaders are common in commerce and entirely legal, as are free trials. I struggle to think of a competent jurisdiction that bans them.

[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dumping_(pricing_policy)

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

#366

Post by [deleted] »

Aerroon wrote: post #262
zythyx wrote: post #99

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Exactly, OpenClaw (or I think possibly an addon/extension or unofficial method) is allowing Googles Antigravity authentication to connect the app. This allows for 'unlimited' calls through Antigravity models with a subscription, instead of the proper Gemini/Google AI Studio API key method (charged per million tokens) API usage can get very high for automatic operations, especially with apps like Kilo/Roo/Cline, and n…

> and get near unlimited use (with rate limits) But they're not near unlimited though. They're just hidden limits.

[deleted]

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

#367

Post by BoorishBears »

gck1 wrote: post #282
danpalmer wrote: post #119

If you go to an all you can eat buffet, ignore the plates they give you, and start filling up your own takeaway boxes with days worth of food, you'd expect to be kicked out. No one would think this is unreasonable. You're not paying for unlimited food forever, you're paying for all you can eat in the restaurant right there.

I'm confused by this repeat analogy here. There's 0 offerings with all you can eat type of deal. No AI service is offering that. They all have amounts defined in their service agreements of how much you can eat and in what intervals.

I'm confused why the presence (or lack of) a limit is relevant to the pretty simple analogy...

A buffet is saying "pay $X to eat food one plate at a time [up to 100 lbs of food]", and you show up and start shoveling the food into your bag. Does not really matter if we remove the 100lbs part.

Could you technically eat the same amount of food one plate a time? Sure. But if everyone does this, $X needs to be significantly more: even for the people who eat one plate at a time.

-

You could also argue they're playing a mean trick and deceiving people because technically someone could eat the same amount of food 1 plate at a time...

But they priced $X based on how much the average person can eat, not how much food they can carry in their arms. If the limits are so high that people don't leave hungry eating 1 plate at a time, it still seems like a fair deal.

I'm not exactly the type to jump for joy at siding with a corporation, but I really don't get why people are in a hurry to ruin a good thing.

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

#368

Post by JumpCrisscross »

fruitworks wrote: post #270
fennecbutt wrote: post #117

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Lmao no. You cannot use your common sim card for that. It's for an individual and they will cut your service and justifiably so, if they figure out that's what you're using it for. If you buy a sim card built for that purpose sure, but then you'll be paying...biz prices! This isn't really that hard to figure out people. So much outrage in comments on this. Self entitlement to the max from people who really haven't li…

I can do it pretty easily. The restriction in both cases is so easily overcome it is ridiculous to build your buisness model around it and disrespectful to the customer's intellect.

> restriction in both cases is so easily overcome

We’re like one comment away from HN discovering that insurance fraud is both easy and punishable.

> disrespectful to the customer's intellect

Murder is easy. It’s not disrespectful to anyone’s intellect to then punish it.

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

#369

Post by petesergeant »

bethekind wrote: post #15

This is draconian. > Our investigation specifically confirmed that the use of your credentials within the third-party tool “open claw” for testing purposes constitutes a violation of the Google Terms of Service [1]. This is due to the use of Antigravity servers to power a non-Antigravity product. I must be transparent and inform you that, in accordance with Google’s policy, this situation falls under a zero tolerance…

Using Google for anything other than search and email has been a poor choice for a long time.

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

#370

Post by techpression »

vineyardmike wrote: post #148
techpression wrote: post #110

Earlier quoted context omitted.

When reading HN I get the impression that a lot of people are convinced monthly plans are very profitable for the companies, I don’t have any numbers but to me it always seemed like a bait and switch or ”bait and make you pay with your data too”.

I'll bite. I suspect that these plans aren't as intensely subsidized as people assume. I believe that API usage is probably also not subsidized at all. First, yes, subs are probably subsided, but I bet a significant % of users are profitable to serve, especially the "chat" users who don't use dev tools and have short context window conversations. Yes, I think the subs also exist as a driver to get lock-in and market…

As a company with little other (any?) revenue you have to include all costs though. Data centers, power, hardware, salaries, marketing, etc. Not just training models and serving requests.

I don’t see how it’s not subsidized substantially considering how much money they’re burning right now (I only base that on their rounds though).

Post reply on HN