Comments on: The lost URL http://www.buzzmachine.com/2008/04/04/the-lost-url/ by Jeff Jarvis Fri, 10 Feb 2012 09:43:34 +0000 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.9.1 hourly 1 By: Some thoughts on Twitter « Korr Values http://www.buzzmachine.com/2008/04/04/the-lost-url/#comment-373167 Some thoughts on Twitter « Korr Values Fri, 11 Apr 2008 18:36:48 +0000 http://www.buzzmachine.com/2008/04/04/the-lost-url/#comment-373167 [...] problem is that URLs count toward the 140-character limit for each Twitter post. Jeff Jarvis asked recently: “Are we losing a wealth of link knowledge on Twitter because it’s all going [...] [...] problem is that URLs count toward the 140-character limit for each Twitter post. Jeff Jarvis asked recently: “Are we losing a wealth of link knowledge on Twitter because it’s all going [...]

]]> By: Espen http://www.buzzmachine.com/2008/04/04/the-lost-url/#comment-372748 Espen Sat, 05 Apr 2008 15:59:55 +0000 http://www.buzzmachine.com/2008/04/04/the-lost-url/#comment-372748 Sounds like a useful plugin - the LinkResolver or something like that. Would show the real link on mouseover and copy it to the clipboard on Ctrl-Click or something like that. Anyone interested? Sounds like a useful plugin – the LinkResolver or something like that. Would show the real link on mouseover and copy it to the clipboard on Ctrl-Click or something like that.

Anyone interested?

]]> By: tomj http://www.buzzmachine.com/2008/04/04/the-lost-url/#comment-372736 tomj Sat, 05 Apr 2008 03:49:21 +0000 http://www.buzzmachine.com/2008/04/04/the-lost-url/#comment-372736 The real question is why tinyurl exists. It exists because there are too many websites which use extremely long urls, usually including an ugly 'query string', that is something after a ? in the url. A good example of a website which doesn't follow this pattern is msnbc and/or slate (same owner). They essentially do what tinyurl does internally. Oh, one other reason tinyurl exists is because a lot of email software can't handle these long urls, so they get chopped up. Most users can't figure this out, so they can't click on the link. But there are still other evils in linking. Even Google has a redirection service, so you can't get the actual url without clicking, so there is a lookup service between Google and the websites. Another evil is simply 'link rot'. This is the opposite of what we are talking about here: a link evaporates. Some valuable information is removed from the internet. But, beside the fact that the information is removed, the documents which reference/link to it are diminished. Over time, users become skeptical of the validity of the linking document. Anyway, this is an old story, and tinyurl isn't much of a help, but isn't any worse than other issues. The real question is why tinyurl exists. It exists because there are too many websites which use extremely long urls, usually including an ugly ‘query string’, that is something after a ? in the url.

A good example of a website which doesn’t follow this pattern is msnbc and/or slate (same owner). They essentially do what tinyurl does internally.

Oh, one other reason tinyurl exists is because a lot of email software can’t handle these long urls, so they get chopped up. Most users can’t figure this out, so they can’t click on the link.

But there are still other evils in linking. Even Google has a redirection service, so you can’t get the actual url without clicking, so there is a lookup service between Google and the websites.

Another evil is simply ‘link rot’. This is the opposite of what we are talking about here: a link evaporates. Some valuable information is removed from the internet. But, beside the fact that the information is removed, the documents which reference/link to it are diminished. Over time, users become skeptical of the validity of the linking document.

Anyway, this is an old story, and tinyurl isn’t much of a help, but isn’t any worse than other issues.

]]> By: Maia http://www.buzzmachine.com/2008/04/04/the-lost-url/#comment-372732 Maia Fri, 04 Apr 2008 23:33:02 +0000 http://www.buzzmachine.com/2008/04/04/the-lost-url/#comment-372732 Twurl.nl does URL tracking of a sort - you can see the top links (that have been shortened with Twurl) etc. Twurl.nl does URL tracking of a sort – you can see the top links (that have been shortened with Twurl) etc.

]]> By: Garrick Van Buren http://www.buzzmachine.com/2008/04/04/the-lost-url/#comment-372729 Garrick Van Buren Fri, 04 Apr 2008 21:48:47 +0000 http://www.buzzmachine.com/2008/04/04/the-lost-url/#comment-372729 Jeff, an excellent point. I agree obfuscating urls by shortening them is a problem. That's why in the new feed aggregator I built, http://cullect.com , shortened urls are auto-expanded. Then, it acts smart about what that original url is; auto-embedding YouTube videos, etc. Jeff, an excellent point. I agree obfuscating urls by shortening them is a problem. That’s why in the new feed aggregator I built, http://cullect.com , shortened urls are auto-expanded. Then, it acts smart about what that original url is; auto-embedding YouTube videos, etc.

]]> By: John Eckman http://www.buzzmachine.com/2008/04/04/the-lost-url/#comment-372726 John Eckman Fri, 04 Apr 2008 21:01:39 +0000 http://www.buzzmachine.com/2008/04/04/the-lost-url/#comment-372726 They're also all marked with rel="nofollow" so they aren't then indexed by search engines. I've often wondered what the impact of this is on sites who get promoted heavily through Twitter - those inbound links must not count in the algorithm. They’re also all marked with rel=”nofollow” so they aren’t then indexed by search engines.

I’ve often wondered what the impact of this is on sites who get promoted heavily through Twitter – those inbound links must not count in the algorithm.

]]> By: Eric http://www.buzzmachine.com/2008/04/04/the-lost-url/#comment-372724 Eric Fri, 04 Apr 2008 20:18:22 +0000 http://www.buzzmachine.com/2008/04/04/the-lost-url/#comment-372724 I totally agree. There should be a better way to see and get the benefit from these links. It would also be great if the system de-duplicated similar URLs and recognized duplicates. Twitter would have to truncate longer URLs to TinyURL or another service, but it would be worth the integration. I totally agree. There should be a better way to see and get the benefit from these links. It would also be great if the system de-duplicated similar URLs and recognized duplicates. Twitter would have to truncate longer URLs to TinyURL or another service, but it would be worth the integration.

]]>