5 ms·

I've never quite understood URL shorteners. They seem like a way of opting into link rot and sending tracking data to third parties who aren't necessary for the

I've never quite understood URL shorteners. They seem like a way of opting into link rot and sending tracking data to third parties who aren't necessary for the client-server connection. Is there a major benefit I'm missing? I could kind of see them if you have a character limit, want to hide the URL, or have to type a URL manually. But manual typing is rare, and even microblogging services are expanding character limits. Hiding the URL seems slightly sketchy, but you can achieve it without a shorter URL so maybe that's not a real benefit. Anyway, I'm actually curious about this because people seem to love them. (and this is aside from all the very valid issues and concerns people have with Google shutting down a widely used service).

mariotacke 1y ago
One use-case I found somewhat reasonable is to shorten to embed the URL in a smaller QR code, especially ones with lots of parameters.
moolcool 1y ago
> But manual typing is rare It's absolutely not rare. I can't tell you how many times I sat in the back of a classroom, squinting at a whiteboard, trying to type copy a URL that looked like this: https://www.nytimes.com/2025/08/12/technology/silicon-chips-doodles.html?unlocked_article_code=1.dk8.ktpG.iQiAmxAo_t80&smid=url-share https://www.nytimes.com/2025/08/12/technology/silicon-chips-...
- bigstrat2003 1y ago
  "Rare" doesn't mean "non-existent". Some people (such as yourself) might indeed need to type links in manually on a regular basis, but for most people it is quite rare.
- kmoser 1y ago
  Not saying you're wrong, just wondering if it was an option to take a picture of the screen using your phone. In my experience, that's how students tend to capture such info when it isn't provided to them electronically.
- const_cast 1y ago
  I think more important than URL shorteners is URL structure. It should work like a directory, where you can intuitively guess what subdirectories there are. This NYT link is actually pretty good. year/month/day/category/title is pretty nice. The query parameter ruins it, but that's kind of unavoidable if you want a reproducible link with extra data. Usually you can omit query parameters and the URL should still work.
  - moolcool 1y ago
    That matters too, but those solve different problems.
unethical_ban 1y ago
For an internal organization filled with non-technical users (most), link shorteners are very useful. Each shortlink has an owner, it can have delegates with edit capability, full history is shown to the entire organization. go/holidays = holiday schedule go/itrequest go/ithelpdesk go/corpcalendar go/fsckyourself = self-service filesystem healthchecks --- yes, it is still a little chaotic, and no, it should not be a complete substitute for a well-indexed corporate directory. But it is a really useful shortcut generator for the people that are good at memorizing them, and it costs little to operate internally. Every place that I've worked at that didn't have one, I wish had one.
- pythonaut_16 1y ago
  Go links are a specific subset of short links with a slightly different purpose than services like goo.gl. And more organizations should adopt them because they are great.
black_puppydog 1y ago
it makes QR codes smaller. /s
skwirl 1y ago
They are useful for putting URLs in print materials like books. Useful for sharing very long links in IRC and some other text based chat apps (many google maps links would span multiple IRC lines if not shortened, for example). They are good for making more easily scannable QR codes.
pythonaut_16 1y ago
QR Codes is the main case I've looked at where the shorter link makes a difference in the complexity (and therefore scannability) of the generated code. But otherwise I think it's about traffic and tracking. First in that you can track visitors to the short link, perhaps in a more centralized place if your org has multiple systems or if you're linking to sites you don't otherwise control. And secondly it's used when tacking on tons of query parameters that would otherwise make it too long even with expanded character limits. And just aesthetically a short link might be more aesthetic in your post. Imagine seeing "link.short/abcd1234" vs "linksrus.corporate/blog/2025/08/12/the-title-of-our-post.html?utm=something&some-other-tracking-param=abcdefghijklmnopqrstuvwxyz&even-more-data-in-the-url&some-hashed-value=QXNoIG5hemcgZHVyYmF0dWzDu2ssCiAgIGFzaCBuYXpnIGdpbWJhdHVsLApBc2ggbmF6ZyB0aHJha2F0dWzDu2sKICAgYWdoIGJ1cnp1bS1pc2hpIGtyaW1wYXR1bAoKT25lIHJpbmcgdG8gcnVsZSB0aGVtIGFsbCwKICAgb25lIHJpbmcgdG8gZmluZCB0aGVtLApPbmUgcmluZyB0byBicmluZyB0aGVtIGFsbAogICBhbmQgaW4gdGhlIGRhcmtuZXNzIGJpbmQgdGhlbS4KCg"
jtbayly 1y ago
The reasons I’ve used them are related to easy tracking of stats. Which (short)links I created to this page are producing traffic? Of course, this is possible in other ways, but note that I said, “easy”. ;)
dkiebd 1y ago
It used to be that characters in urls would count for the character limit in tweets. So people would use shorteners to be able to fit more stuff in a tweet.
xmprt 1y ago
I never used them for shortening the URL but it helped to give a human understandable name to a link. For example, if I'm linking to a Google Doc, then I can either share the base64(?) link that Google autogenerates, or share short.link/insert-name-here.
cxr 1y ago
It's Conway's law again. Orgs could mint and maintain uptime for short/memorable permalinks hosted on their own domains, but the Web has been captured by a professional class with predilections and goals all their own and which are rarely aligned with the org and the people/purpose it serves.
benwills 1y ago
URL shorteners significantly increased in popularity as Twitter did. There was originally a 140 character limit that became quite squeezed when adding most URLs, especially to blog posts where the title is part of the URL. Later, adding things like analytics and tracking (eg: not just in social media, but also in email campaigns) became another reason to use them, especially for those less tech inclined.
o11c 1y ago
Historically there were a lot of CMS's with very small character limits. I remember a war between my high school teachers trying to make their pages work, and the IT department trying to ban all URL shorteners categorically (which admittedly I never understood, given that the DNS interceptor should be able to catch the redirected domain)

mariotacke 1y ago

One use-case I found somewhat reasonable is to shorten to embed the URL in a smaller QR code, especially ones with lots of parameters.

moolcool 1y ago

> But manual typing is rare It's absolutely not rare. I can't tell you how many times I sat in the back of a classroom, squinting at a whiteboard, trying to type copy a URL that looked like this: https://www.nytimes.com/2025/08/12/technology/silicon-chips-doodles.html?unlocked_article_code=1.dk8.ktpG.iQiAmxAo_t80&smid=url-share https://www.nytimes.com/2025/08/12/technology/silicon-chips-...

bigstrat2003 1y ago
"Rare" doesn't mean "non-existent". Some people (such as yourself) might indeed need to type links in manually on a regular basis, but for most people it is quite rare.
kmoser 1y ago
Not saying you're wrong, just wondering if it was an option to take a picture of the screen using your phone. In my experience, that's how students tend to capture such info when it isn't provided to them electronically.
const_cast 1y ago
I think more important than URL shorteners is URL structure. It should work like a directory, where you can intuitively guess what subdirectories there are. This NYT link is actually pretty good. year/month/day/category/title is pretty nice. The query parameter ruins it, but that's kind of unavoidable if you want a reproducible link with extra data. Usually you can omit query parameters and the URL should still work.
- moolcool 1y ago
  That matters too, but those solve different problems.

unethical_ban 1y ago

For an internal organization filled with non-technical users (most), link shorteners are very useful. Each shortlink has an owner, it can have delegates with edit capability, full history is shown to the entire organization. go/holidays = holiday schedule go/itrequest go/ithelpdesk go/corpcalendar go/fsckyourself = self-service filesystem healthchecks --- yes, it is still a little chaotic, and no, it should not be a complete substitute for a well-indexed corporate directory. But it is a really useful shortcut generator for the people that are good at memorizing them, and it costs little to operate internally. Every place that I've worked at that didn't have one, I wish had one.

pythonaut_16 1y ago
Go links are a specific subset of short links with a slightly different purpose than services like goo.gl. And more organizations should adopt them because they are great.

black_puppydog 1y ago

it makes QR codes smaller. /s

skwirl 1y ago

They are useful for putting URLs in print materials like books. Useful for sharing very long links in IRC and some other text based chat apps (many google maps links would span multiple IRC lines if not shortened, for example). They are good for making more easily scannable QR codes.

pythonaut_16 1y ago

QR Codes is the main case I've looked at where the shorter link makes a difference in the complexity (and therefore scannability) of the generated code. But otherwise I think it's about traffic and tracking. First in that you can track visitors to the short link, perhaps in a more centralized place if your org has multiple systems or if you're linking to sites you don't otherwise control. And secondly it's used when tacking on tons of query parameters that would otherwise make it too long even with expanded character limits. And just aesthetically a short link might be more aesthetic in your post. Imagine seeing "link.short/abcd1234" vs "linksrus.corporate/blog/2025/08/12/the-title-of-our-post.html?utm=something&some-other-tracking-param=abcdefghijklmnopqrstuvwxyz&even-more-data-in-the-url&some-hashed-value=QXNoIG5hemcgZHVyYmF0dWzDu2ssCiAgIGFzaCBuYXpnIGdpbWJhdHVsLApBc2ggbmF6ZyB0aHJha2F0dWzDu2sKICAgYWdoIGJ1cnp1bS1pc2hpIGtyaW1wYXR1bAoKT25lIHJpbmcgdG8gcnVsZSB0aGVtIGFsbCwKICAgb25lIHJpbmcgdG8gZmluZCB0aGVtLApPbmUgcmluZyB0byBicmluZyB0aGVtIGFsbAogICBhbmQgaW4gdGhlIGRhcmtuZXNzIGJpbmQgdGhlbS4KCg"

jtbayly 1y ago

The reasons I’ve used them are related to easy tracking of stats. Which (short)links I created to this page are producing traffic? Of course, this is possible in other ways, but note that I said, “easy”. ;)

dkiebd 1y ago

It used to be that characters in urls would count for the character limit in tweets. So people would use shorteners to be able to fit more stuff in a tweet.

xmprt 1y ago

I never used them for shortening the URL but it helped to give a human understandable name to a link. For example, if I'm linking to a Google Doc, then I can either share the base64(?) link that Google autogenerates, or share short.link/insert-name-here.

cxr 1y ago

It's Conway's law again. Orgs could mint and maintain uptime for short/memorable permalinks hosted on their own domains, but the Web has been captured by a professional class with predilections and goals all their own and which are rarely aligned with the org and the people/purpose it serves.

benwills 1y ago

URL shorteners significantly increased in popularity as Twitter did. There was originally a 140 character limit that became quite squeezed when adding most URLs, especially to blog posts where the title is part of the URL. Later, adding things like analytics and tracking (eg: not just in social media, but also in email campaigns) became another reason to use them, especially for those less tech inclined.

o11c 1y ago

Historically there were a lot of CMS's with very small character limits. I remember a war between my high school teachers trying to make their pages work, and the IT department trying to ban all URL shorteners categorically (which admittedly I never understood, given that the DNS interceptor should be able to catch the redirected domain)