> On Sat, 2005-03-05 at 16:16, Todd Walton wrote:
> 
> > The other beef I have with TinyURL use is the reliability of the
> > TinyURL service.  They've been around since at least February of 2002.
> >  That's three whole years.  But what happens when, say, 20 years from
> > now they're gone?  What if somebody else buys the domain name and
> > starts cashing in on all those dormant tinyurl hyperlinks out there?
> > What about the freaking page I wanted to link to?!??

Well urls often have a short lifetime anyway. So far lifetime of a tinyurl 
is, what? three years or some such. The net is full of links that are broken
in far less time. tinyurls have proved to be useful for a a variety of reasons
but mostly for shortening long urls. This utility suggests that the service
may well be around for a long time. 

> > Proposal:
> >
> > I think that when a TinyURL is employed, the real link should also be
> > included.  Plain and simple.  If the real, long URL gets mucked up, so
> > be it.  But at least it's there, and a person can see where they're
> > being taken before they follow the link, as well as the actual
> > Internet address being referred to being available for posterity's
> > sake.

More trouble than it is worth. 

boblq "SLB"


-- 
[email protected]
http://www.kernel-panic.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/kplug-list

Reply via email to