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

431–440 of 752 posts

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

#431

Post by cyberax »

raw_anon_1111 wrote: post #380
cyberax wrote: post #185

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

So every company that is not immediately selling enough to cover its fixed costs and its variable cost should be illegal? Every company and every new initiative must be profitable from day one in your world?

If it's a large company, that can dominate the market by absorbing the losses until competition disappears?

Arguably, yes.

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

#432

Post by shevy-java »

Every day Google shows its true evil nature. So here clearly they want to offset competitors. That's the true agenda. We saw this when Google crippled ublock origin and then claimed the extension is "harmful", merely because it threatens Google's greed-income via ads.

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

#433

Post by shevy-java »

tabs_or_spaces wrote: post #319

So the timeline is basically * User uses Google oauth to integrate their open claw * user gets banned from using Google AI services with no warning * user still gets charged If you go backwards, getting charged for services you can't access is rough. I feel sorry for those who are deeply integrated into Google services or getting banned on their main accounts. It's not a great situation. Also, getting banned without…

> Also, getting banned without warning is rough as well.

Agreed. The lesson is: do not become dependent on Google. Ever.

(Unfortunately I still use youtube and a chromium-based browser. Long-term I hope to find alternatives to both problems. Google search I no longer need because Google already ruined it a few years ago; the quality now is just horrible. I can not find anything useful with it anymore.)

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

#435

Post by solatic »

lukeschlather wrote: post #307
gck1 wrote: post #259

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Yes the models are smart, but you really cant "build things" despite the marketing if you actively beat back your users for trying I think this is the most important takeaway from this thread and at some point, this will end up biting Google and Anthropic back. OpenAI seems to have realized this and is actively trying to do the opposite. They welcomed OpenCode the same day Anthropic banned them, X is full of tweets…

My impression is there's a definite shortage of GPUs, and if OpenAI is more reliable it's because they have fewer customers relative to the number of GPUs they have. I don't think Google is handing out 429s because they are worried about overspending; I think it's because they literally cannot serve the requests.

OpenAI is dependent on same hyperscalers (most specifically Microsoft/Azure) as everyone else, and even have access to preferential pricing due to their partnership.

A better explanation is to point out that ChatGPT is still far and away the most popular AI product on the planet right now. When ChatGPT has so many more users, multi-tenant economic effects are stronger, taking advantage of a larger number of GPUs. Think of S3: requests for a million files may load them from literally a million drives due to the sheer size of S3, and even a huge spike from a single customer fades into relatively stable overall load due to the sheer number of tenants. OpenAI likely has similar hardware efficiencies at play and thus can afford to be more generous with spikes from individual customers using OpenCode etc.

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

#436

Post by ingatorp »

hsaliak wrote: post #245

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 o…

I've stopped using Gemini models altogether because of this. I'm using Claude Code with MiniMax M2.5 for a while now and i couldn't be happier. I haven't noticed any drop in output quality and the biggest advantage is that even the $10 is pretty generous. I haven't been hit with rate limit, not even one time. And i'm pretty heavy user. I tried also GLM 5.0 but i hit rate limit there pretty early on.

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

#437

Post by fmbb »

tabs_or_spaces wrote: post #319

So the timeline is basically * User uses Google oauth to integrate their open claw * user gets banned from using Google AI services with no warning * user still gets charged If you go backwards, getting charged for services you can't access is rough. I feel sorry for those who are deeply integrated into Google services or getting banned on their main accounts. It's not a great situation. Also, getting banned without…

1. Did a human really knowingly decide to allow that?

2. Did a human create the plugin?

3. Are the maintainers human?

By human I mean an animal that is intelligent enough to understand the agreements and what code they are writing.

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

#439

Post by raw_anon_1111 »

cyberax wrote: post #431
raw_anon_1111 wrote: post #380

Earlier quoted context omitted.

So every company that is not immediately selling enough to cover its fixed costs and its variable cost should be illegal? Every company and every new initiative must be profitable from day one in your world?

If it's a large company, that can dominate the market by absorbing the losses until competition disappears? Arguably, yes.

So that means for instance it was illegal for Netflix to get into the streaming business or for Apple to start selling iPods because neither could do it profitably from day one?

Should Microsoft have not been allowed to sell operating systems and still survive from selling BASIC interpreters? Should Nintendo have not been allowed to sell video games and still be selling playing cards?

Every company that is interested in survival takes profits from an existing business to start a new one,

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

#440

Post by vincston »

shevy-java wrote: post #433
tabs_or_spaces wrote: post #319

So the timeline is basically * User uses Google oauth to integrate their open claw * user gets banned from using Google AI services with no warning * user still gets charged If you go backwards, getting charged for services you can't access is rough. I feel sorry for those who are deeply integrated into Google services or getting banned on their main accounts. It's not a great situation. Also, getting banned without…

> Also, getting banned without warning is rough as well. Agreed. The lesson is: do not become dependent on Google. Ever. (Unfortunately I still use youtube and a chromium-based browser. Long-term I hope to find alternatives to both problems. Google search I no longer need because Google already ruined it a few years ago; the quality now is just horrible. I can not find anything useful with it anymore.)

What google search alternative have you found? Im trying out ecosia, duckduckgo and brave search, but i find their search results even worse, so in the second query i tend to bang to google..
Post reply on HN