I recently saw Terence Eden’s blog with the title “Never use a URL shortening service - even if you own it”. The main gripe expressed here is that they will let you down eventually.
The point of the article is essentially that it is only a matter of time until you lose control of the URL. An example is that The Guardian sold their gu.com
(Guardian Unlimited) sold to academics. They have now put the domain up for sale for millions.
In my professional life I also see the use of link shortening, and it drives me mad! I will give some examples of where I see it:
There are several problems that are being addressed here:
An additional problem the shortening services could address is one that affects all links - link rot. If you are going to middleman the links, why don’t you offer a service to archive the link? This could use the Internet Archive. Another option could be to take a very basic copy of the target’s content.
Yet another problem that could be consider by shortening services is link previews. Some content will use Open Graph to generate previews, but tonnes of content does not. They could all content to be previewed by generating a render of the page or finding some interesting image, which should further help security too.
For the basic role of shortening links, we could look at a simple compression algorithm. Browsers could play a large part in this role. We could take advantage of the following:
http://
or https://
. We could immediately encode this as a single bit.