Way too risky to use Google services like this tied to your primary account. There’s too much risk of cross damage. Imagine losing access to your Gmail because some Gemini request flags you as an undesirable. The digital death sentence of losing access to your email with a company that notoriously has no way for the average human to contact a human is not worth the risk.
tjoff 44 minutes ago [-]
Use a custom domain and don't use google for email.
And if you do use your gmail address just forward it and start to transition to something else. With time everything of importance has been transferred.
aliljet 39 minutes ago [-]
How do you even pull away from a Gmail address? I'm nearly twenty years into that service. Getting banned would be absolutely devastating...
calcifer 36 minutes ago [-]
Use your own domain to sign up for a paid email service, provided by a company that focuses on email. I use Fastmail, but there are many other options.
Set up forwarding in Gmail to your new address.
Then, whenever you log in to a website or app with your Gmail, take a moment to change it to your new address. In a few weeks, most of your important accounts will be covered. In a few months, almost everything you still actively use will be done.
I did this ~5 years ago and the only thing that still arrives at my Gmail is spam.
cube00 36 minutes ago [-]
Get your own domain so you can easily change providers in the future. Start with your password manager and change the address on all the accounts you have in there.
After a few years you'll notice you stop bothering to check your Gmail and you can delete it to close the address.
If you need motivation, skim the /r/GMail subreddit and see how many people are getting locked out daily.
36 minutes ago [-]
8cvor6j844qw_d6 35 minutes ago [-]
Same. I still have an old Gmail address that receives forgotten but still considered important emails from various services.
What's the playbook for migrating away in this situation?
cube00 33 minutes ago [-]
Companies need to allow you update your personal information including your email. It may need tickets to support but it's doable.
Hikikomori 35 minutes ago [-]
Just have to get started and suffer for a while and make it a practice to switch emails when you log into places.
I switched to fastmail with my own domain.
gman83 1 hours ago [-]
This wasn't due to some random Gemini request. Users were using sketchy antigravity auth plugins to use their antigravity tokens on things like OpenClaw, clearly against ToS. It's great that Google is giving these users a second chance.
amiga386 1 hours ago [-]
Yes, our masters once again embarrass us unworthy peons with their endless grace, generosity and forebearance. How lucky we are to entrust our data and our lives to them!
WarmWash 43 minutes ago [-]
Anyone can buy the tokens via the API and do whatever they want with them.
Its not evil of Google to say "Here is an allotment of steeply discounted tokens, but you can only use them with our services."
exitb 1 hours ago [-]
If a 3rd party product advertises compatibility with a Google service and you use it to login via a first party Google login page, doesn’t the responsibility fall somewhere between the offending product and Google itself? In practice it’s structured pretty much like a phishing attempt.
Notably some model providers explicitly allow that very flow, while others will ban you without notice.
n8m8 47 minutes ago [-]
If the "3rd party product" is you selfhosting FOSS, then that's you (OpenClaw users)
johnebgd 1 hours ago [-]
It’s be great if Google just revoked antigravity access if terms were violated. No need to disable the entire account.
LiamPowell 1 hours ago [-]
> just revoked antigravity access
That's exactly what they did, plus Gemini CLI and Code Assist, which are the same product in different formats.
TGower 50 minutes ago [-]
Only Antigravity and Gemini access was banned, not email or other google account stuff.
dangus 1 hours ago [-]
I’ll go further: there should be laws addressing account consolidation. Getting banned from an Apple or Google account is an incredibly wide blast radius. It would be like being banned from buying Unilever or Nestle food from your grocery store.
zarzavat 1 hours ago [-]
Okay but they were paying customers paying $$$ for the service. Banning your customers without prior warning is not right, however sketchy their behaviour might appear. Even if it's obvious to Google that there's a difference between a Gemini API key and an Antigravity API key, it's not necessarily obvious to others.
The correct and sane thing to do is to send them an email, with at most a 24 hour suspension. If they keep doing it despite being warned then by all means fire them.
jamesnorden 58 minutes ago [-]
>It's great that Google is giving these users a second chance.
I hope this is sarcasm. A permaban as the first action is never a good idea.
crawshaw 1 hours ago [-]
The concern is not losing access to some new IDE for operating outside the terms of service. The concern is when you lose access to the IDE, you also lose access to your 20 year old Gmail account.
A general problem for Google products is that everything is mixed together.
NicuCalcea 1 hours ago [-]
When's the last time you read the ToS of a service you signed up for?
982307932084 52 minutes ago [-]
"Hey Gemini, write a short blurb casting our capriciousness in a good light."
HardCodedBias 50 minutes ago [-]
AFAIK it has clearly been a ban of Gemini and not of all people's Google accounts.
However many stories appeared where people tried to claim that their whole Google account was banned to gain traction.
Unless it is clear that a full Google account has been banned we should push back on any story that claims this.
The danger here is they'll ban you with no specific reason, fill out the form and you get an automatic unban and then something else automatically flags and you're banned the second time permanently.
Support bot will then say "you were warned, read the TOS" and you get to guess what you did wrong.
You'll notice there are no appeals or reviews in this workflow.
Google has no creditability when it comes to handling account bans.
clickety_clack 57 minutes ago [-]
People are crazy to use Google as the core of their online identity.
oofbey 44 minutes ago [-]
Ex googler here. It is based on Google’s fundamental disdain of customers. Googlers are repeatedly told by management that they are the smartest people in the world and that their time is too valuable to spend on silly things like helping customers.
jascha_eng 2 hours ago [-]
I still kinda wish that the subscriptions would just allow you to use the tokens however you wish.
I get that they rely on people not using all of their quota. But e.g. with open code it doesn't really matter if I use antigravity or gemini-cli the usage should be about the same.
What they are actually trying to force you to do is to pay for the tokens that you don't use in their applications to increase their revenue and/or give their in-house tools an "unfair" advantage. But this is bad for the consumer because it means that there is less competition between coding agents and unless I'm willing to pay per token I have to take one of the model labs agents.
Anticompetitive behaviour imo they could just ban reselling tokens or something like that instead of locking your subscription in like this.
gruez 36 minutes ago [-]
>I still kinda wish that the subscriptions would just allow you to use the tokens however you wish. I get that they rely on people not using all of their quota. But e.g. with open code it doesn't really matter if I use antigravity or gemini-cli the usage should be about the same.
This is almost as realistic as "I wish netflix or youtube allowed me to use VLC to watch their content".
NitpickLawyer 1 hours ago [-]
> I get that they rely on people not using all of their quota
They have no problem with users using their quota on their own software. Because they get the signals. They do have a problem with users using the API in 3rd party software, because they don't get the signals.
falcor84 1 hours ago [-]
Well ... the clear signal is that people want to use Google's models but not Google products
theblazehen 40 minutes ago [-]
Most people have actually just been using Opus through antigravity
55 minutes ago [-]
Analemma_ 1 hours ago [-]
> But e.g. with open code it doesn't really matter if I use antigravity or gemini-cli the usage should be about the same.
This is not at all true. What is prompting this behavior from Google and Anthropic is that people are using their oauth creds/API keys to run OpenClaw bots that use orders of magnitude more tokens than the IDEs. The official clients also can use a lot more prompt caching because they have expected workflows.
And like, if you want to run OpenClaw, they’re not saying you can’t do that: use the API pricing, that’s what it’s for. But people are getting mad that they’re not allowed to roll their pickup truck up to the all-you-can-eat buffet table and fill it.
narmiouh 39 minutes ago [-]
I see a lot of comments in googles defense, part of me wonders whats the split between google employees(even so people in teams related to these products) and normies who ignore the true underlying issue here…
Google consistently fails to provide a process to deal with user issues.
You donot see many reports of these at Amazon, Microsoft, Apple, and many more providers. Though Meta learns from google I think.
cube00 29 minutes ago [-]
Microsoft has a had a few high profile cases of locking people out and taking their OneDrive with it.
esskay 42 minutes ago [-]
All this whole thing did is ensure I never, ever use any google AI service. The fact that they didn't instantly comprehend what a total account ban means when they've got people with 20+ years worth of personal data in those accounts is incredibly concerning.
RyanShook 1 hours ago [-]
What I don’t understand about policy violations is why Google never warns the user before banning. A simple alert or email would reduce so much frustration on the part of users and so much overhead for Google.
ToS change frequently and it’s not really fair to assume the user knows what is and is not correct use of tokens.
solfox 56 minutes ago [-]
Not just Google. This seems to be the default for most tech giants. I was banned on Facebook for an unknown reason, not provided any explanation, and given zero recourse. Had to resort to reaching out to a friend who worked there.
43 minutes ago [-]
fsalbrechter 1 hours ago [-]
Still no clarification if they block your whole Google account or just Gemini?
Thorrez 1 hours ago [-]
Not the entire Google account.
> bans for Antigravity usage also blocked access to Gemini CLI and Gemini Code Assist.
Disclosure: I work at Google, but not on anything related to this.
consumer451 2 hours ago [-]
Just wanted to say that Windsurf is chugging along just great. No drama for users, excellent outputs at low cost. I am confused why they are not used more widely.
WarmWash 54 minutes ago [-]
The problem wasn't antigravity, the problem was funneling clawdbot tokens through it (with a 3rd party plugin) to skirt API costs.
johnebgd 1 hours ago [-]
We use them as well. Great product.
iepathos 2 hours ago [-]
Refreshing response from Google especially given the incompetence with which Anthropic has handled bans.
cogman10 2 hours ago [-]
This is the correct way to handle this situation.
sergiotapia 37 minutes ago [-]
Complete risk to use google products like this with your real account. My youtube is still banned over uploading two clips of Dexter's Laboratory over 15 years ago.
Today I could have uploaded them fine, and let whoever owns the cartoon make money I was just a fan of the show.
marcd35 39 minutes ago [-]
cool. now do something about the hundreds/thousands of people getting rate limited on Antigravity even after upgrading their plans, even on their $250 /month plan.
I feel dumb. I've never heard of Antigravity until now.
gozzoo 51 minutes ago [-]
Good for you :)
oofbey 42 minutes ago [-]
Welcome to the singularity, now in progress. One of its defining features is that things move too fast for people to keep up.
1 hours ago [-]
xrd 2 hours ago [-]
Another recent concern on other posts here on HN is whether a private company should have veto power over the US government. Or, another way to look at it, whether the US government should be able to designate a company as a supply chain risk and ban them from most business in the host country.
If I squint at the conversation, it doesn't seem that different from a behemoth company taking an employee of a private company and forcing them to still stop working for arbitrary reasons.
I'm giving agents and coding tools wide berth here, but if AI is going to replace all employees, what guarantees do you have as the employer that your employees will do your bidding, and not the bidding of enterprises with a shifting moral landscape?
Once we have tooling wrapped around specific agents, it'll be hard to rehire. What will we do then when our "employees" are furloughed?
This will be especially relevant when the big AI labs decide they need to enter a market to justify an obscene valuation. Or, when the sovereign wealth fund decides they don't like the direction of a business.
This is a good and honorable decision by Google. But it also brings up scary times ahead.
Rendered at 16:29:10 GMT+0000 (Coordinated Universal Time) with Vercel.
And if you do use your gmail address just forward it and start to transition to something else. With time everything of importance has been transferred.
Set up forwarding in Gmail to your new address.
Then, whenever you log in to a website or app with your Gmail, take a moment to change it to your new address. In a few weeks, most of your important accounts will be covered. In a few months, almost everything you still actively use will be done.
I did this ~5 years ago and the only thing that still arrives at my Gmail is spam.
After a few years you'll notice you stop bothering to check your Gmail and you can delete it to close the address.
If you need motivation, skim the /r/GMail subreddit and see how many people are getting locked out daily.
What's the playbook for migrating away in this situation?
I switched to fastmail with my own domain.
Its not evil of Google to say "Here is an allotment of steeply discounted tokens, but you can only use them with our services."
Notably some model providers explicitly allow that very flow, while others will ban you without notice.
That's exactly what they did, plus Gemini CLI and Code Assist, which are the same product in different formats.
The correct and sane thing to do is to send them an email, with at most a 24 hour suspension. If they keep doing it despite being warned then by all means fire them.
I hope this is sarcasm. A permaban as the first action is never a good idea.
A general problem for Google products is that everything is mixed together.
However many stories appeared where people tried to claim that their whole Google account was banned to gain traction.
Unless it is clear that a full Google account has been banned we should push back on any story that claims this.
A week? Try at least 16 days
https://discuss.ai.google.dev/t/account-restricted-without-w...
The danger here is they'll ban you with no specific reason, fill out the form and you get an automatic unban and then something else automatically flags and you're banned the second time permanently.
Support bot will then say "you were warned, read the TOS" and you get to guess what you did wrong.
You'll notice there are no appeals or reviews in this workflow.
Google has no creditability when it comes to handling account bans.
What they are actually trying to force you to do is to pay for the tokens that you don't use in their applications to increase their revenue and/or give their in-house tools an "unfair" advantage. But this is bad for the consumer because it means that there is less competition between coding agents and unless I'm willing to pay per token I have to take one of the model labs agents.
Anticompetitive behaviour imo they could just ban reselling tokens or something like that instead of locking your subscription in like this.
This is almost as realistic as "I wish netflix or youtube allowed me to use VLC to watch their content".
They have no problem with users using their quota on their own software. Because they get the signals. They do have a problem with users using the API in 3rd party software, because they don't get the signals.
This is not at all true. What is prompting this behavior from Google and Anthropic is that people are using their oauth creds/API keys to run OpenClaw bots that use orders of magnitude more tokens than the IDEs. The official clients also can use a lot more prompt caching because they have expected workflows.
And like, if you want to run OpenClaw, they’re not saying you can’t do that: use the API pricing, that’s what it’s for. But people are getting mad that they’re not allowed to roll their pickup truck up to the all-you-can-eat buffet table and fill it.
Google consistently fails to provide a process to deal with user issues. You donot see many reports of these at Amazon, Microsoft, Apple, and many more providers. Though Meta learns from google I think.
ToS change frequently and it’s not really fair to assume the user knows what is and is not correct use of tokens.
> bans for Antigravity usage also blocked access to Gemini CLI and Gemini Code Assist.
Disclosure: I work at Google, but not on anything related to this.
Today I could have uploaded them fine, and let whoever owns the cartoon make money I was just a fan of the show.
https://discuss.ai.google.dev/c/antigravity/64
If I squint at the conversation, it doesn't seem that different from a behemoth company taking an employee of a private company and forcing them to still stop working for arbitrary reasons.
I'm giving agents and coding tools wide berth here, but if AI is going to replace all employees, what guarantees do you have as the employer that your employees will do your bidding, and not the bidding of enterprises with a shifting moral landscape?
Once we have tooling wrapped around specific agents, it'll be hard to rehire. What will we do then when our "employees" are furloughed?
This will be especially relevant when the big AI labs decide they need to enter a market to justify an obscene valuation. Or, when the sovereign wealth fund decides they don't like the direction of a business.
This is a good and honorable decision by Google. But it also brings up scary times ahead.