I have Carbon in VS Code and the Antigravity CLI.

Seems like a completely fair and normal business practice to do a gradual roll-out first to trusted testers, then to Ultra, maybe to Pro later. Not sure why Plus and free users feel so aggrieved that they can't free-ride with those paying $200/month.

▲

overfeed a day ago | parent | next [-]

Hating on Google is cool, but pretending not to understand pricing tiers is weird as hell; when those 2 collide, you get this thread. Smart HNers, who I assume are fine understanding multidimensional tiers like the one Netflix has (price/resolution/simultaneous devices/ads) are seemingly very confused by Googles 2D AI tiers[1] (price/model availability)

1. Granted, the Google One pricing page is crowded with non-AI stuff, but for the AI model section is easy to understand what each subscription level gets you.

▲

ipaddr a day ago | parent | prev [-]

$200 a month is free riding on API users the $20 a month isn't free riding on the $200 plan.

	▲	panarky a day ago \| parent \| next [-]
		Do you have any evidence that subscriptions are loss leaders? And by evidence, I mean something more than "at API rates my usage would have cost $1000". Because Anthropic's SEC docs show that subscriptions are gross-margin positive. Since Google has lower inference costs than Anthropic, I'd expect their subscriptions to be more profitable, not less.
	▲	nothercastle a day ago \| parent \| prev [-]
		Paying 20$ a month for search already seems like a lot. That’s really what the 20$ tier is for