Live data from Hacker News

Google restricting Google AI Pro/Ultra subscribers for using OpenClaw

discuss.ai.google.dev

601–610 of 752 posts

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

#601

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.

> But we’re also running full speed into an ecosystem controlled by 2 or 3 major companies.

We aren't, though. They think we are :-/

The reality is that tokens are the second-lowest value link in the AI value-chain (the lowest-value item being electricity).

These providers are operating low down in the value chain; they are trying to sell a fungible, easy replaceable and (if hardware price trends is any indication) easily self-hostable.

They have no secret sauce, no moat. If they jack up the prices, their users will simply move to the next provider, and repeat ad nauseum as long as VCs want to subsidise in the hope of a landgrab.

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

#603

Google, unlike all their competitors, actually give Cloud API credits to all paying users of AI Pro and AI Ultra [1] - just use those for direct Gemini/Vertex API access instead of trying to hack the OAuth of Google's apps. [1] https://blog.google/innovation-and-ai/technology/developers-...

great point - I am a heavy user of API calls (using an API key) for gemini-3-flash-preview and I find it difficult to spend my free API credits.

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

#604

Earlier quoted context omitted.

what you described is that using google is a novel business risk

Google has gigantic power over its users. Consider that for some reason, Google banned your gmail account, which you are using for large number of logins for different essential services.

All it takes is Google to ban you from one service and you’re locked out of things like, oh I don’t know, GCP…

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

#605

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…

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…

Can I at least log in one last time and download my gmail messages from 2004?

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

#606
post #479

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Subsidizing the cost of developing a product isn't necessarily bad, but predatory pricing that prohibits competition would be. Not sure that this case is either. This is just idiots breaking the TOS.

So exactly what’s the difference between “predatory pricing” and pricing to gain customers and market share? Should Sony have to sell the first PlayStation off the line at $2000 (making up a number) so it can sell it at a marginal profit from day one or should it sell it below cost knowing that that over its lifetime if it stays at that price, it will both gain customers and sell at a profit in year 4 as the price of…

The EU uses an effects-based model. If below-cost prices are driving other actors out of business or has other anti-competitive effects, it is predatory pricing.

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

#607
post #543
post #492

Additional information from Google employee https://x.com/_mohansolo/status/2025766889205739899 : "We’ve been seeing a massive increase in malicious usage of the Anitgravity backend that has tremendously degraded the quality of service for our users. We needed to find a path to quickly shut off access to these users that are not using the product as intended. We understand that a subset of these users were not aware…

> will get a path for them to come back on That's not what support has been telling their $250 a month customers. we are unable to reverse the suspension [1] I get the need to move fast to stabilise the service but similar to an outage it doesn't take much to put a banner on the support page to let customers know bans are temporary until they can come up with a better way of educating customers. Further more it doesn…

come on, using a monthly paid subscription to obtain auth tokens to use claws bots is quite obviously agains T&C. you need to pay api prices for that. I am sure 100% of those knew they were doing something wrong but proceeded anyway.

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

#608

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm not familiar with their originals economics, but the original streaming Netflix was not priced below the cost. As evidenced by them keeping the same subscription cost for years.

How is that “evidence” of anything? The “evidence” that they were charging less for subscriptions than it cost to run the streaming service is that they were borrowing billions of dollars to both license content and create new content over the course of years. Netflix borrowed $16 billion over a decades https://www.nytimes.com/2021/01/19/business/netflix-earnings... Because subscriptions didn’t make enough money to f…

Yes. They were. The US just hasn't enforced antitrust laws in decades.

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

#609
post #450

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That's how AI is supposed to be used, no? That's what the providers advertise - it increases development speed, a lot, it replaces devs and so on. But I guess it's only ok when you work on regular joe facing projects, where the consequences of bugs are on powerless users. If the consequences are on Google, well, that's not acceptable now is it?

The consequences for Google are that the people are misusing the keys and the Google is fixing that. They're not banning anybody using proper API keys

[flagged]

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

#610

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

I mean it's easy to get away with. Murder, presumably, is not
Post reply on HN