Google URL Shortener Opened To the Public 244
Anonymusing writes "Just what the world needs, another URL shortener, right? Google seems to think so, and it's making its own widely available to anyone — complete with tracking and statistics — for free. As noted on its blog: 'There are many shorteners out there with great features, so some people may wonder whether the world really needs yet another. As we said late last year, we built goo.gl with a focus on quality. With goo.gl, every time you shorten a URL, you know it will work, it will work fast, and it will keep working. You also know that when you click a goo.gl shortened URL, you're protected against malware, phishing and spam using the same industry-leading technology we use in search and other products.' Is bit.ly shaking in its boots?"
complete with tracking and statistics (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:complete with tracking and statistics (Score:5, Interesting)
You have a point... as the goo.gl site says "All goo.gl URLs and click analytics are public and can be shared by anyone."
Then again, it's the first URL shortening site that has a too-big-to-fail company behind it so we don't have to worry about a tr.im-like shutdown threat.
Re: (Score:2)
Re:complete with tracking and statistics (Score:5, Insightful)
It's not just the tracking that's bad, it's all the problems that come with having an extra middle man and not being able to see what you are clicking. Certainly Google doesn't protect everyone from all malware that shows up in search results, there's no reason to think they can here (I think they do a good job considering, but malware is still hugely pervasive). It also breaks the move to a more semantic web. Just look at Slashdot's URL for this story and you can see what the story is about, what category it's in and when it was posted.
interesting blog post i read a few months back about some of the pitfalls [schachter.org]
In my opinion URL shortening is bad for the web, and bad for usability. It's also something pretty easily created by any website on their own if they really need it.
Re: (Score:2)
I completely agree. It's the fact that I don't know what I'm clicking that is the most concern for me. I don't think that I've ever knowingly clicked on a shortened URL for that reason.
I guess that I could understand why people who use twitter or other SMS technologies might want a shortened URL, but as you already mentioned, any site can do that for themself if they want. I don't think that anybody has a 140+ char domain name in use.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2, Interesting)
It still brakes the readability of URLs (yes, it's usually far from perfect anyway, but the domain at least tells something); well, I guess this one might be slightly less evil, also in the mentioned stats gathering, right?...
(or allowing one to see the target url, assuming you're logged into Google Account of course)
Re:complete with tracking and statistics (Score:5, Funny)
Re: (Score:2)
Well, there's a better one to tolerate: http://goo.gl/ [zombieurl.com]
Re: (Score:2)
I clicked your link and it asked me to input "brainz"
Re:complete with tracking and statistics (Score:5, Funny)
I got a rock...
Re: (Score:2)
http://goo.gl/3YQc [goo.gl]
Too big to fail? (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
It'd be interesting to imagine that scenario in a what-if-google-turned-off-tomorrow instead of a google-declines-and-is-replaced-by-others scenario that is more likely.
Google switches off tomorrow: what would the result be?
No more GMail, no more Google Maps, no more Google Ads, no more YouTube, no more Google Apps, no more Google DNS.
Anyone want to pitch in with the likely impact of these things?
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
I Am Not a Number (Score:3, Insightful)
I am not a number!
I am the aggregate of a huge array of numbers!
Re: (Score:2)
This is a typical comment. I don't really know what the point of it is though. Are you warning us as if we didn't know? Do you think Google should come up with services, but you find it distasteful for them to benefit or profit from them? Is it some sort of existential scream of "I'm not a number dammit! I'm a person!"? Do you believe this is part of a dark conspiracy that will end in some sort of dystopian future? Is it just snark against Mr. Popular: Google?
What's the difference? (Score:2)
All those others are tracking you and making you a statistic except you don't know what evil companies they sell the info to.
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
Please mod parent down - it's NSFW.
Re: (Score:2)
Re:complete with tracking and statistics (Score:4, Informative)
https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/162021/ [mozilla.org]
This Firefox add-on (Their homepage http://long-shore.com/ [long-shore.com] has Opera and Chrome support as well) allowed me to hover the link and see that it was a Goatse link.
Very useful.
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/162021/ [mozilla.org]
This Firefox add-on (Their homepage http://long-shore.com/ [long-shore.com] has Opera and Chrome support as well) allowed me to hover the link and see that it was a Goatse link.
Very useful.
My unrivaled intellect allowed me to know that it was a Goatse link as the poster was trying to make a point and the link name was "gaping hole." Not sure why the Troll mod as his point is valid and anyone dumb enough to click a link with that text on it shouldn't be on the internet.
Re: (Score:2)
Re:complete with tracking and statistics (Score:5, Funny)
Re: (Score:2)
Not only that, but it links you to some cheesy Sorority Life application on Facebook.
Re: (Score:2)
Whoring!
I don't know what the prize is, but I'm not clicking!
Re: (Score:2)
In fact, until I found it 4 hours ago, it only had 5 hits. The other 800 are from my posts - and I only found it by trying some obvious combinations, like sh1t which gives a whale.
But the link title really says it all - Failbook is a security risk to begin with, and combining it with goo.gl is NOT a good idea. The only real reason for url shorteners is twitter a
Re:complete with tracking and statistics (Score:5, Informative)
This also explains why, until I pointed it out (found by random testing of obvious word+number combos) a couple of hours ago, it only had 5 hits in all that time. It's since had almost 800 in the last 4 hours alone [goo.gl]
So blame some google tester - not me. I'm just pointing out the flaws in the system - and there are many. Don't shoot the messenger, mkay?
Re: (Score:2)
Or in other words, according to Google, the craphole is the combination of Facebook and Twitter.
Re: (Score:2)
Can you invite them as friends? Can you say social networking?
Please don't give them ideas :(
Who? (Score:5, Insightful)
Is bit.ly shaking in its boots?
Dunno, I've never heard of them before. Should I have?
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
Is bit.ly shaking in its boots?
Dunno, I've never heard of them before. Should I have?
Only if you're one of the freaks that uses twitter...
Chop off two letters (Score:5, Funny)
g.gl, get to it google engineers. Short as hell.
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
Can't. GL domain registration requires at least 3 letters.
Also, their domains apparently cost $95 per year, which seems a little steep.
Re: (Score:2)
Nope. I usually use j.mp, which is bit.ly's lesser-known, two-characters-shorter version. But for even shorter, there's to [domainnamenews.com].
Re: (Score:2)
Greenland is up for sale?
No, but you are not the first person to confuse it with Iceland.
Unique feature (Score:4, Funny)
Re: (Score:2)
goo.gl shortens goo.gl url's as well! No, I will not write an evil script. Someone has to do the 'No Evil', right?
I certainly wouldn't click on goo.gurl [slashdot.org] ! Or would I?!
Do not want (Score:2, Funny)
The last thing the world need is yet another semisolid fat for food preparation.
Wait, what's the subject again?
Shortfight! (Score:3, Interesting)
I've always preferred SoCuteURL [socuteurl.com]. It makes URL's that are sometimes short, sometimes long, but always a lot easier to retype (say, from a text message) than a computer-generated hash. For example, I've got a better chance of telling someone how to type in socuteurl.com/yappypupperpig [socuteurl.com] (so cute u r l dot com slash yappy pupper pig) than I do goo.gl slash anything.
Of course, I also have a soft spot in my heart for http://urlshorteningservicefortwitter.com/ [urlshorten...witter.com] -- but they refuse to "shorten" http://goo.gl/ [goo.gl] for me, saying "This URL has been rejected to prevent the universe from collapsing on itself."
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
There's been some attempts at this. Like link rel="shorturl" href="example.org/1234"
Nobody's really taken advantage of the sites that have implemented it though.
tr.im was the best (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Keep working? (Score:5, Interesting)
Like Wave, right?
Re:Keep working? (Score:4, Informative)
Like Wave, right?
You realize that while they stopped development of further wave features, it is still available and functioning for anyone who wants to use it?
Re: (Score:2)
You realize that while they stopped development of further wave features, it is still available and functioning for anyone who wants to use it?
So, how long will that last?
Actually, I think I finally saw a use case for Wave the other night. There was an earthquake here (rare in NH) and a WTF-fest broke out on 3 or 4 of the first Facebook comments in my social network, several referencing Twitter searches.
I *think* this is what Wave is for. I'm still not sure, though.
Re: (Score:2)
Once Google decides Wave is dragging themselves down, it will optionally disappear, just like old YouTube profiles [mashable.com] and Blogger FTP [blogger.com].
As if.. (Score:2)
Google Wave is functioning _as of right now_. What about in two years?
The cancelled the "any URL to RSS" feature in Google Reader yesterday. I was told about this... yesterday. Yay for giving me time to set up a different system!
Re: (Score:2)
I know it was mostly for the humor (and it was funny), but Wave is a project that never left "alpha", must less ever came close to "beta". Goo.gl, on the other hand, is official, live, and supported. When they say it'll stay, I'm pretty sure they mean it.
FOR FREE OMG (Score:3, Insightful)
this reminds me of the old "subscribe to my free newsletter". who the hell pays for an URL shortener in the first place?
Re: (Score:2)
You do, of course. Google (or whoever) gets to know where you're going and what you're looking at. Same as all Google's other free services - ads and tracking.
Now, the question is, does being default search engine on Android justify it's cost? Particularly when you'd probably be default search engine anyway? Or is Google going to have to do something evil?
TinyURL (Score:5, Informative)
Re:TinyURL (Score:5, Informative)
I just hazarded a guess and appended a + to a goo.gl url (since that's the syntax bit.ly uses) and lo and behold, it took me to the info page for the url.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
http://goo.gl/cr4p+ [goo.gl]
The power of slashdot.
RS
the good shortened URLs are already gone (Score:2, Funny)
I wrote a script that would keep re-submitting my URL until I ended up with goo.gl/R2D2, but found out it was already used. I think I'll make a mosaic of the 23,864 QR barcodes on the side of a building somewhere as a social commentary.
Security check while generating shortened link? (Score:2, Interesting)
Google chrome provides security warning while trying to navigate to suspicious site. Will this be available while generating/clicking shortened link from any browser - I mean independent of browser capability and settings?
shadyurl (Score:2)
Still not as good as shadyurl :
http://5z8.info/bomb-plans_p7p8n_stalin [5z8.info]
Re: (Score:2)
Darn, you beat me to it. Definitely one of the best! :)
Here's slashdot: http://5z8.info/gain-inches_d1p0h_launchexe [5z8.info]
Find All the URL Shorteners (Score:2)
Comment removed (Score:3, Informative)
Re: (Score:2)
McAfee (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Already done. I don't trust outside URL shorteners, and my URL is already short enough, so
http://www.towrs.com/article/96/The-John-Hancock-Center-Chicago [towrs.com]
includes a clip-box with the shortened URL
http://towrs.com/Z96 [towrs.com]
Still less reliable than a real URL (Score:4, Insightful)
It's still less reliable than a URL to the actual page, and can still be used to trick people into visiting sites they would not want to visit if they knew the URL. And remember, these shorteners should only be used when a short URL is needed. Anywhere you can embed a link, it doesn't matter if it's ridiculously long [abcdefghij...fghijk.com]. Only where the URL itself must be included as plain text does its length even possibly matter.
blah (Score:2, Interesting)
bit.ly is still better because... (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
In this day of drive by attacks... (Score:4, Informative)
I find url shorteners to be dangerous. You don't know that it links to. And I find that everyone seems to use them, even the security "professionals" that it really makes no sense.
While I understand how handy they are when you need to share a link with someone in voice or something. But I never click on them from articles or anything. I refuse.
Imagine the Internet is a gun. URL Shorteners are the chambers. A bad link is the bullet.
Now imagine that gun is pointed at your head, and everytime you click on a shortened URL, you are pulling the trigger.
Ahh, but does it protect you from. . . (Score:3, Insightful)
goatse, tubgirl, etc?
I can't imagine they could possibly protect you from every possible. . . undesirable thing that someone might create a shortened link to.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
The great thing is that, unlike most shortened urls, this one is fairly easy to remember. "mill" spelled backwards, with the middle two letters upper-case.
I'm not so sure about the "quality" part :-)
Re: (Score:2)
http://tech.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=1804806&cid=33754434 [slashdot.org]
There is, and I already posted a comment on it.
Re: (Score:2)
Also, possibly the only time someone has a chance at +5 informative for posting goatse.
Nope. Not the only time, and not the first one [slashdot.org] either
Linked comment has a certain age already, http://www.hick.org/goat [hick.org] used to be an alias for goatse but unfortunately no longer works. But you can still recognize the giver.jpg and hello.jpg suffixes.
Re:So, who's going to be the 1st to shorten goatse (Score:4, Funny)
It would be interesting to test all the 4-letter/number combos and see what the distribution of content is. A simple test with a common 4-letter word shows that they're censoring words from the url shortening pool.
BTW cr4p [goo.gl] brings you to facebook - how appropriate.
Re: (Score:2)
Makes me wonder if somebody has been playing...
Re: (Score:2)
I wish I could take credit for it. That's the sort of thing that "just works", and you KNOW it's going to make the rounds.
Mother Nature might be a B*tch, but she also has a sense of humour.
Re: (Score:2)
created April 13th, 2010 - and only 2 clicks. One of them was mine, and the other one was ...?
Long URL: www.facebook.com/pages/I-Support-Death-by-Sandwich/114394155245805?v=wall
I guess a lot of the testers use Failbook.
Re: (Score:2)
-- Saving people from Rick Rolls since 2006
Re: (Score:2, Informative)
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
As in what's here? http://goo.gl/info/Kjyl#week [goo.gl]
I'm sure it'll change over time, but the stats from the first 24 visitors from Slashdot are quite interesting:
Browsers
Firefox: 10
Chrome: 7
Mobile: 2
Opera: 2
Safari: 2
Arora: 1
This tells me that Slashdot users don't use IE. At least, not those who read brand-new stories and are willing to click an unknown link and chancing NSFW content. Thankfully, it's SFW, unless your boss was already "gonna give you up".
I'll be curious how those stats hold up tomorrow!
Re: (Score:2)
A quarter of the machines are nix too. Year of linux on the desktop! ;-)
or year of admins reading slashdot on the server?
Platforms
Windows 22
Other Unix 10
Macintosh 5
iPod 2
iPhone 1
Re: (Score:2)
http://goo.gl/info/lLIm#week [goo.gl] -link to stats page, not redirected to goatse.
Firefox 172 43%
Chrome 79 20%
IE 3 1%
Also 89 are "other Unix" which is 22%. Not clear what that is though, as there are other dedicated categories for Linux and Mac. I would guess it is Linux though, as coming
Re: (Score:2)
At least, not those who read brand-new stories and are willing to click an unknown link and chancing NSFW content
Also a lot of people who browse slash from work have to use IE, so they have two reasons not to risk NSFW content.
Re: (Score:2)
Doesn't seem to be changing much. As of now, only 3 out of 148 clicks have been from IE. I guess 3 AC's must have clicked the link :)
Re: (Score:2, Informative)
It's about keyspace.
Given 4 bytes of [a-zA-Z0-9] gives you 14,776,336 possible combinations while [a-z0-9] only gives you a mere 1,679,616 possible combinations.
Assuming they'll eventually up the number of bytes up to six (ie. 4 to 6 bytes), you'll get 57,731,144,752 combinations case sensitive compared to just 2,238,928,128 case insensitive.
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
But, if you're really clever, you can do something like four sets of octets to tell people, it is about as intuitive as URL shorteners.
Re: (Score:2)
No, although I've started to see them mentioned all the time in the last six months or so. I assume they are another Facebook-type site but I don't care enough to find out.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
It will work fastly?
Re: (Score:2)
There's a few of them.
I tried goo.gl/rick and got someone's facebook page.
Re: (Score:2)
It gets shortened to any number of other things; they don't seem to keep track of sites that are already in the database, and instead assign a new URL each time. It even shortens it's own shortened links. I got bored and made a chain of them - if you click here [slashdot.org] it will take you through 10 redirects before finally getting to goo.gl.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Lessee... they tried making a browser, an OS, a VOIP app, an office suite... all duds. They bought YouTube and now they're ruining it by putting ads on top of people's videos. Everything Google touches turns to s&#t except, of course, for search.
Maybe they should stick with what they do right. I'm sure the shareholders would appreciate the savings in the form of dividends.
Without commenting on your interesting and unusual interpretation of the word "duds", I do think you should have had a look at their stock performance before saying silly things about shareholder value and dividends.
Re: (Score:2)