• jarfil@beehaw.org
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    57
    ·
    1 year ago

    I can track engagement, and I can update them if need be

    That’s inherently bad as in:

    • Third party (you) tracking the user
    • Hiding the true target from the user
    • Destroying any attempt at content archival

    They’re not inherently bad “for you”, just for everyone else.

    • Greg Clarke@lemmy.ca
      cake
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      14
      ·
      1 year ago

      Third party (you) tracking the user

      I’m not tracking users, I’m tracking engagement. I’m not Zuckerberg

      Hiding the true target from the user

      99.99% of website use a reverse proxy, the target is nearly always hidden. I don’t think you understand how the internet works.

      Destroying any attempt at content archival

      Who would archive a shortened URL and not follow the link to its target? It’s not my fault if people don’t know how to archive my content.

      URL shorteners are not inherently bad.

      • jarfil@beehaw.org
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        5
        ·
        1 year ago

        I’m not tracking users, I’m tracking engagement

        Whose engagement? Anything on your server, you can track it with the access logs, do you know how the internet works?

        99.99% of website use a reverse proxy, the target is nearly always hidden. I don’t think you understand how the internet works.

        Do you know how a reverse proxy works? It doesn’t change the user-facing URL like a shortener.

        Who would archive a shortened URL and not follow the link to its target? It’s not my fault if people don’t know how to archive my content.

        Someone archiving the original content. It’s your fault for breaking the link at a whim.

        URL shorteners are inherently bad.

        • Greg Clarke@lemmy.ca
          cake
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          1 year ago

          Whose engagement?

          The engagement with my presentation for instance. I don’t care about tracking specific users.

          It doesn’t change the user-facing URL like a shortener.

          Where the user-facing URL points can easily be changed! For instance, changing the DNS record or changing where the reverse proxy points. I really don’t think you understand how the internet works under the hood.

          Someone archiving the original content. It’s your fault for breaking the link at a whim.

          I’m not going to optimize my content for lazy archivers. Check out web.archive.org for an example of how to properly archive, they update the URLs so links don’t break

    • redcalcium@lemmy.institute
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      8
      ·
      1 year ago

      Third party (you) tracking the user

      No, he’s not a third party, he’s the second party in this context because you visit his own website, hosted on his own server.

      • jarfil@beehaw.org
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        10
        ·
        1 year ago

        On his own website, hosted on his own server, he has server logs to track whatever he wants, change whatever content he wants to display, and do whatever else he wants.

        The only reason to use a URL shortener, is to interpose himself between his server and someone else’s server, meaning to become a third party to the relationship between user and other server.

    • 👁️👄👁️@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      1 year ago

      I see zero reason why others would be entitled to archive your content, nor hiding the true target from the user. Those are not bad things.