5 ms·
I agree. I think URL shortening is a bad practice. More convenient, but very short term and it adds one more breaking point to the Internet. How many URL short
by pj 18y ago
I agree. I think URL shortening is a bad practice. More convenient, but very short term and it adds one more breaking point to the Internet. How many URL shorteners are there and how many of them will bite the dust?
When they do, all the links behind their shortened urls will be gone forever! Regardless of whether or not the link it pointed to still exists.
- vorador 18y agoPeople use shortened urls as a throwaway resource. I doubt that they attach much importance about their permanence.
- deleted 18y ago[deleted]
- bradgessler 18y agoAgreed. Furthermore, the shortened URLs typically point to the large, better named URLs anyway. For applications, like search engines, that index the web; they should take resources that respond with an HTTP 302 or 301 with a grain of salt and/or index the resource they redirect to. Frankly, I'm getting tired of the debates around how shortened URLs are bad.
- pj 18y agoThere are no more throw away resources. A lot of the shortened urls are going to twitter, of course, but those tweets are copy/pasted into blogs and those are copy pasted... Those blogs could be around for ever and ever. Do you think Google will just stop hosting blogger and all the companies with blogs will stop hosting the content? The companies may be around forever too. The web archive catches as much as it can. I don't really know if anything on the internet will ever go away anymore forever.
- vorador 18y agoWell, content rots and disappears, as after a certain period of time it is not accessible from the first five pages of google.