On 03/08/2011 01:46 PM, Yet Another Ninja wrote: > I'll never grasp why one would use one of those in mail.
Many shortened links allow you to anonymously track click-throughs (clicks-through?), e.g. adding a plus sign to any bit.ly or j.mp URI will bring anybody to the stats (and target) of the link. Marketing emailers love using obfuscated URI redirectors to track users. I've always been confused about why the resulting tracking links are so enormously long. There are still plenty of email and IM clients out there that fail to properly wrap enormously long URIs (such as google maps links). I'm actually surprised google doesn't use goo.gl or whatever for the "Link" button in that interface. I can't remember the last time I sent somebody a non-shortened link that was over 150 characters. > I thought there was consense to educate users *not* to visit links > they don't know and now we hear that something which hides potential > danger is ok to be used? The conscious effort to educate users about the targets of their links is for phish rather than things that are introduced as new.
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
