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

451–460 of 752 posts

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

#451

Post by fy20 »

cogman10 wrote: post #22
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…

Oh man. What a wonderful way to stop people from using your LLM. All these AI companies trying to get everyone to be locked into their toolchains is just hilariously short sighted. Particularly for dev tools. It's the sure path to get devs to hate your product. And for what? The devs are already paying a pretty penny to use your LLM. Why do you also need to force them to using your toolkit?

Antigravity is useless anyway. I tried it last week and it needs approval for every file read and tool call. There's an option in the app to auto-approve, except it doesn't work. Plenty of complaints online about this. Clearly they don't actually care about the product, some exec just felt that they need to get into the editor game.

Next I tried using the Antigravity Gemini plan through OpenCode (I guess also a bannable offense?) and the first request used up my limit for the week.

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

#452

Post by lelanthran »

jimbob45 wrote: post #372
torginus wrote: post #107

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Isn't the reason companies are doing this because they're offering tokens at a discount, provided they're spent through their tooling? Considering the tremendous amount of tokens OpenClaw can burn for something that has nothing to do with sofware development, I think it's reasonable for Google to not allow using tokens reserved for Antigravity. I don't think there's such a restriction if you pay for the API out of po…

Then it should be “This is your first and final warning. The next time we catch you, it’s a ban.”. People are building their lives around this stuff and kneejerk bans erode good faith in your platform.

> Then it should be “This is your first and final warning. The next time we catch you, it’s a ban.”. People are building their lives around this stuff and kneejerk bans erode good faith in your platform.

This is actually the soft-touch approach: the users of these vibe-coded products need to understand that they are delegating their authority to the tool to work on their behalf.

In this case, they delegated to a tool that broke the ToS. The result could have been a lot worse, and in return they learned that the tool is acting with their full authority.

-----------------

EDIT:

One of the users got this response from google support:

> Our product engineering team has confirmed that your account was suspended from using our Antigravity service. This suspension affects your access to the Gemini CLI and any other service that uses the Cloud Code Private API.

Their decision? To break ToS on some other provider:

> I guess it is time to move on to Codex or Claude Code.

So, yeah, perhaps the users really are too stupid to understand what's going on, and even this soft-touch approach has done nothing to clue them in.

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

#455

Post by pmontra »

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.

It's been my present for about 10 years. It's wonderful. Social media damage mental health. Messages with friends don't.

Group chats are borderline but I can silence them for a few hours when people start quarreling and I don't care taking part in the discussion. No infiniscroll, no addiction.

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

#456

Post by lelanthran »

overgard wrote: post #404
cogman10 wrote: post #22

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Oh man. What a wonderful way to stop people from using your LLM. All these AI companies trying to get everyone to be locked into their toolchains is just hilariously short sighted. Particularly for dev tools. It's the sure path to get devs to hate your product. And for what? The devs are already paying a pretty penny to use your LLM. Why do you also need to force them to using your toolkit?

The tool thing is kind of infuriating at the moment. I've been using Claude on the command line so I can use my subscription. It's fine, but it also feels kind of silly, like I'm looking at ccusage and it seems like I'm using way more $ in tokens than I'm paying for with the subscription. Which is a win for me, but, I don't really feel like Claude Code is such a compelling product that it's going to keep me locked in…

> I dunno, it seems like way more cost effective to use the first party tools but I'm not sure why they really want that. Are the third party tools just really inefficient with API usage or something?

No, the first party tools, even if they used the same number of tokens, gives them valuable data for their training.

Essentially, the first party tools are subsidised because it saves them money on gathering even more training data. When you use a 3rd party tool, you are expected to pay the actual cost of each token.

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

#457

Post by lelanthran »

sowbug wrote: post #109
noosphr wrote: post #45

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You are being subsidised to the tune of 50 to 99.9 cents on the dollar compared to the API. What the hell do you expect? To get paid for using other people's tools on Google's servers?

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.

> Suspending customers for [snipped]

They are being banned (not suspended) for breaking the ToS, not for what you imagine them to be suspended for.

It doesn't matter how expensive a provider plan you purchase, the provider is free to end their contract with you, permanently if they want to, if you breach their terms of service.

You also get the same freedom.

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

#458

Post by concinds »

causal wrote: post #266
hatsix wrote: post #228

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Google wants usage that earns them street cred, not usage from bots who will never evaluate the output. They're all fighting tooth and nail to acquire customers, both free and paid... they didn't want their giveaways to be burned.

But banning accounts wholesale is not going to earn them more customers. They could have just disabled Gemini access, or even given a warning first. I don't use OpenClaw, I do pay hundreds per month for AI subscriptions, and I will not be giving that money to Google while they treat their customers like this.

> They could have just disabled Gemini access

They just disabled Antigravity access.

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

#459

Post by animuchan »

fmbb wrote: post #437
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.

Most people aren't human then, sad.

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

#460

Post by lelanthran »

sowbug wrote: post #227
sigmar wrote: post #188

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Suspending customers for using a fairly expensive subscription plan -- especially forfeiting an annual prepayment for a day or two of coloring outside the lines they're being suspended for using a private api outside of the app for which the api was intended. If you make a clone of the hbo app, so that you can watch hbo shows without ads by logging in with your discounted ads-included membership, your account will…

The facts are straightforward, even without analogies. But since we're using them... You are at the grocery store, checking out. The total comes to $250. You pay, but then remember you had a coupon. You present it to the cashier, who calls the manager over. The manager informed you that you've attempted to use an expired coupon, which is a violation of Paragraph 53 subsection d of their Terms of Service. They keep yo…

> They keep your groceries and your $250, and they ban you from the store.

If you signed an agreement with the grocery store that says they will ban you with no refunds for doing $FOO, and you do $FOO, then you can't expect any sympathy when you get banned, now can you?

In any case, your analogy is broken, because this is a monthly subscription, not a once-off purchase: when you pay for a month of subscription and then get banned, you don't expect to get that month's payment back.

Post reply on HN