4 ms·

So we have a problem. What's the solution? Use something like http://www.snap.com http://www.snap.com all over the place? Seems like that being able to see wher

by vyrotek 18y ago

So we have a problem. What's the solution? Use something like http://www.snap.com http://www.snap.com all over the place? Seems like that being able to see where the shortURL leads is one way to counter it.

knowtheory 18y ago
The problem isn't just the opacity, it's that url shorteners add an extra, and extremely flaky point of failure in the web request cycle. The web is patchy enough already w/ domains expiring and sites rearranging their content (w/o a way to update 3rd party links elsewhere). Add to this another service that may or may not be around in 5 years to the opacity and you've got scads of links going dead if one service/domain goes dead. If perhaps there was a common shared standard for how the hashes mapped to urls, that was reversible, then it'd be less of a problem, since then you just stick the hash into another service that supports minified urls, and you're fine. It'd be a good project for google :P
potatolicious 18y ago
How about non-confusing URLs, and stop using query strings in place of URLs? http://www.someone.tld/products/coolthing/ http://www.someone.tld/products/coolthing/ is better than http://www.someone.tld/page?type=product&id=2386712&lang=en_us http://www.someone.tld/page?type=product&id=2386712&... If you wanted to push this further, use your own permalink on your site, something like: http://p.somesite.tld/23a44fd http://p.somesite.tld/23a44fd It's not descriptive, but at least it gives you credit for the page.
- DannoHung 18y ago
  I'd argue that the majority of people that are using URL shorteners have a more fundamental problem: They don't even realize that most of the params aren't needed. For example, I recently looked at this King Hokum CD on Amazon (awesome artist BTW, this CD is stupid overpriced though): http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B0012U346Y/ref=s9_sims_gw_s2_p15_i1?pf_rd_m=ATVPDKIKX0DER&pf_rd_s=center-2&pf_rd_r=0T627SFJ995DPDR7SZHP&pf_rd_t=101&pf_rd_p=470938631&pf_rd_i=507846 http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B0012U346Y/ref=s9_sims_gw_s... What's the relevant part? http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B0012U346Y http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B0012U346Y But how the hell does someone know that without dicking around?!
  - rizzn 18y ago
    That still won't help someone who's trying to paste it into Twitter or a Facebook status feed.
    - tlrobinson 18y ago
      Those are problems that should be solved by Twitter and Facebook. Give people a way to put a link with shorter link text, something simple like Markdown [text](url) format. If the message is being sent to SMS or some other constrained medium, then automatically shorten it. Chances are that link won't be distributed beyond the device it's sent to anyway.
  - Devilboy 18y ago
    Youtube helps users by providing a link for you to copy, sites like Amazon should do the same.
    - lena 18y ago
      I agree, but please don't let that be the short link. The Amazon link DannoHung mentions is a bit weird, but Amazon's default links are really helpful, with the title in it. People often link to a book like this: "<a href="http://www.amazon.com/Designing-Web-Interfaces-Principles-Interactions/dp/0596516258 http://www.amazon.com/Designing-Web-Interfaces-Principles-In...; is a good book!" I find it useful that when I mouseover the link, I can see the title of the book, and then realize I either already know the book, don't like the book, or would like to read more. If the link is just <a href="http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/0596008031 http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/0596008031">this</a...; I have to click before knowing what exactly the book is that the person recommends. Useful URL's are a good thing and it saddens me that the current debate does not focus on that more and that people even argue that standard url's should be short and non descriptive.
      - Tichy 18y ago
        Why not offer both a long and a short URL at the same time?

by vyrotek 18y ago

knowtheory 18y ago

The problem isn't just the opacity, it's that url shorteners add an extra, and extremely flaky point of failure in the web request cycle. The web is patchy enough already w/ domains expiring and sites rearranging their content (w/o a way to update 3rd party links elsewhere). Add to this another service that may or may not be around in 5 years to the opacity and you've got scads of links going dead if one service/domain goes dead. If perhaps there was a common shared standard for how the hashes mapped to urls, that was reversible, then it'd be less of a problem, since then you just stick the hash into another service that supports minified urls, and you're fine. It'd be a good project for google :P

potatolicious 18y ago

How about non-confusing URLs, and stop using query strings in place of URLs? http://www.someone.tld/products/coolthing/ http://www.someone.tld/products/coolthing/ is better than http://www.someone.tld/page?type=product&id=2386712&lang=en_us http://www.someone.tld/page?type=product&id=2386712&... If you wanted to push this further, use your own permalink on your site, something like: http://p.somesite.tld/23a44fd http://p.somesite.tld/23a44fd It's not descriptive, but at least it gives you credit for the page.

DannoHung 18y ago
I'd argue that the majority of people that are using URL shorteners have a more fundamental problem: They don't even realize that most of the params aren't needed. For example, I recently looked at this King Hokum CD on Amazon (awesome artist BTW, this CD is stupid overpriced though): http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B0012U346Y/ref=s9_sims_gw_s2_p15_i1?pf_rd_m=ATVPDKIKX0DER&pf_rd_s=center-2&pf_rd_r=0T627SFJ995DPDR7SZHP&pf_rd_t=101&pf_rd_p=470938631&pf_rd_i=507846 http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B0012U346Y/ref=s9_sims_gw_s... What's the relevant part? http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B0012U346Y http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B0012U346Y But how the hell does someone know that without dicking around?!
- rizzn 18y ago
  That still won't help someone who's trying to paste it into Twitter or a Facebook status feed.
  - tlrobinson 18y ago
    Those are problems that should be solved by Twitter and Facebook. Give people a way to put a link with shorter link text, something simple like Markdown [text](url) format. If the message is being sent to SMS or some other constrained medium, then automatically shorten it. Chances are that link won't be distributed beyond the device it's sent to anyway.
- Devilboy 18y ago
  Youtube helps users by providing a link for you to copy, sites like Amazon should do the same.
  - lena 18y ago
    I agree, but please don't let that be the short link. The Amazon link DannoHung mentions is a bit weird, but Amazon's default links are really helpful, with the title in it. People often link to a book like this: "<a href="http://www.amazon.com/Designing-Web-Interfaces-Principles-Interactions/dp/0596516258 http://www.amazon.com/Designing-Web-Interfaces-Principles-In...; is a good book!" I find it useful that when I mouseover the link, I can see the title of the book, and then realize I either already know the book, don't like the book, or would like to read more. If the link is just <a href="http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/0596008031 http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/0596008031">this</a...; I have to click before knowing what exactly the book is that the person recommends. Useful URL's are a good thing and it saddens me that the current debate does not focus on that more and that people even argue that standard url's should be short and non descriptive.
    - Tichy 18y ago
      Why not offer both a long and a short URL at the same time?