[OT] TinyURLs

[FND]

With regards to my habit of providing TinyURLs, I have been asked why I
also include the original URL.

The short answer, courtesy of Saq: "because you're a pedant" - while I
can't deny that, let's try not oversimplify here...

The reason I provide TinyURLs in the first place is because many people
subscribe to this group via e-mail, and those mails are usually sent in
plain-text format - meaning that lines are wrapped after ~72 characters,
which in turn means that links longer than that are broken into two or
more pieces (some e-mail clients are more lenient/smart than others in
this regard).

However, TinyURLs are often considered "evil" - e.g. they can be abused
to lead unsuspecting people to malicious sites. By also providing the
original, direct URL, I circumvent those issues.
More info here:
http://blog.igorminar.com/2007/09/tinyurls-are-evil.html
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tinyurl#Criticism

-- F.

[Scott Elcomb]

On Feb 12, 2008 6:24 AM, FND <FN...@gmx.net> wrote:
>
> With regards to my habit of providing TinyURLs, I have been asked why I
> also include the original URL.

[...]

> However, TinyURLs are often considered "evil" - e.g. they can be abused
> to lead unsuspecting people to malicious sites. By also providing the
> original, direct URL, I circumvent those issues.

This is the primary motivator for me. Providing the full URL doesn't
garauntee that the TinyURL won't point to malicious site, but the
reader will have a choice (to click or copy+paste+unmangle) to visit
the proffered address(es).

TinyURL is a great little tool when used with care.

--
Scott Elcomb
http://www.psema4.com/

[FND]

> With regards to my habit of providing TinyURLs, I have been asked why I
> also include the original URL.

Here's the bookmarklet I use:
http://fnd.lewcid.org/blog/archive/16

-- F.