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

631–640 of 752 posts

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

#631

Post by JKCalhoun »

saalweachter wrote: post #624

So purely from a hacker perspective, I'm amused at the whining . Like, a corporation had a weakness you could exploit to get free/cheap thing. Fair game. Then someone shares the exploit with a bunch of script kiddies, they exploit it to the Nth degree, and the company immediately notices and shuts everyone down. Like, my dudes, what did you think was going to happen? You treasure these little tricks, use them cautiou…

Kind of a built-in feature of a Cool Thing is that it will get found/shared/widespread.

(See Napster.)

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

#632

Post by JKCalhoun »

xnx wrote: 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…

My fascination with local LLMs has waxed and waned over the past year or so. And then something like this comes along and it waxes again mightily. ;-)

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

#633

Post by AnthonyMouse »

ljm wrote: post #553
KronisLV wrote: post #521

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> We understand that a subset of these users were not aware that this was against our ToS and will get a path for them to come back on but we have limited capacity and want to be fair to our actual users. It feels like a good default for this would be something similar to video game bans: where you get a "vacation" from the service with a clear reason for why that is, but can return to using it later. Given how much…

Getting your Google Workspace account nuked because an employee hooked their company Gemini account to OpenClaw would certainly be a novel business risk.

Isn't that pretty much par for the course for these megacorps? Account gets banned as a disproportionate response to something minor, or in many cases for no explicable reason at all, and anyone without enough of a platform to do "bad PR escalation" via social media or traditional media gets to learn the hard way that their "customer service" is just a brick wall that can't or won't do anything about it.

Adopting a massive dependency on a single company is generally a mistake.

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

#634

Post by gck1 »

danpalmer wrote: post #364
gck1 wrote: post #282

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

You can't sneak in a container and consume more than allocated though. The limits are enforced server side.

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

#636

Post by novaleaf »

miroljub wrote: post #628
saalweachter wrote: post #624

So purely from a hacker perspective, I'm amused at the whining . Like, a corporation had a weakness you could exploit to get free/cheap thing. Fair game. Then someone shares the exploit with a bunch of script kiddies, they exploit it to the Nth degree, and the company immediately notices and shuts everyone down. Like, my dudes, what did you think was going to happen? You treasure these little tricks, use them cautiou…

> So purely from a hacker perspective, I'm amused at the whining. > Like, a corporation had a weakness you could exploit to get free/cheap thing. Fair game. From a pure hacker perspective, I'm surprised there are people calling a legitimate usage a "weakness you could exploit"? What weakness? What exploit? People have been using it in a way that was technically possible. And they paid for it, many purchased the produ…

Arn't they yoinking an OAuth token for replay in the Claw app?

If so, I don't think anybody who knows how auth works could feign complete innocence.

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

#637

Post by pja »

ForHackernews wrote: post #609
ddalex wrote: post #450

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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]

You’re responsible for the things your AI agent does.

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

#638

Post by ndriscoll »

infecto wrote: post #616
PunchTornado wrote: post #607

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

Sometimes I wonder where I am when people are so shocked. I genuinely don’t understand who would think this is allowable? Is this simply a younger generation and I am old now? API keys vs the auth tokens smells the same as public vs private APIs, don’t be surprised you get shut off if you are using a private API.

To the extent that that's true, it would be in the opposite direction? Auth tokens are meant to be used by the User Agent to effect the wishes of user, often encode permissions the user has, and are used with public APIs like those intended for web browsers. API keys are usually for private communication like server to server.

The usual expectation is you don't care what agent the user is running. You just care about what they're doing with it (permissions, rate limits, etc.).

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

#639

Post by rolymath »

miroljub wrote: post #628
saalweachter wrote: post #624

So purely from a hacker perspective, I'm amused at the whining . Like, a corporation had a weakness you could exploit to get free/cheap thing. Fair game. Then someone shares the exploit with a bunch of script kiddies, they exploit it to the Nth degree, and the company immediately notices and shuts everyone down. Like, my dudes, what did you think was going to happen? You treasure these little tricks, use them cautiou…

> So purely from a hacker perspective, I'm amused at the whining. > Like, a corporation had a weakness you could exploit to get free/cheap thing. Fair game. From a pure hacker perspective, I'm surprised there are people calling a legitimate usage a "weakness you could exploit"? What weakness? What exploit? People have been using it in a way that was technically possible. And they paid for it, many purchased the produ…

Google changed the ToS to disallow this usage? I'm pretty sure it was disallowed from the beginning

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

#640

Post by pixl97 »

AnthonyMouse wrote: post #633
ljm wrote: post #553

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Getting your Google Workspace account nuked because an employee hooked their company Gemini account to OpenClaw would certainly be a novel business risk.

Isn't that pretty much par for the course for these megacorps? Account gets banned as a disproportionate response to something minor, or in many cases for no explicable reason at all, and anyone without enough of a platform to do "bad PR escalation" via social media or traditional media gets to learn the hard way that their "customer service" is just a brick wall that can't or won't do anything about it. Adopting a m…

Heh, how long before the few remaining companies left share their ban lists like casinos and you pretty much get blacklisted from the internet
Post reply on HN