Did you know that you don't need to use link shorteners (bit.ly, etc.) on Mastodon? All links, no matter how long, only count for 23 characters against your 500 limit!

(And since link shorteners are bad for user experience and break the web, there's almost no good reason to use 'em! 😄)

@jond is gnu social replacing links? I saw a post from @patrickbreyer with URLs rewritten as it were for tracking...
@saper @jond GNU Social does rewrite long links, but it has no tracking built in. In fact, it tries to dereference shorturls and tracking links to re-point to the eventual destination.
@lnxw37a1 @jond but adding tracking is trivial outside of it :(
@jond And as a bit of trivia, it's 23 characters because that's the number of characters in the Twitter shortener.
@jond why 23, anyway?

@Felthry Guess how long a https t.co link is. Basically, "we'll only count 23 chars against your post length count because, even if you used a link shortener, it won't get any* shorter than that, so be nice and use a full link."

(* okay, yes, it is possible)

@jond They're good for depicting links that are likely to be typed in, if they're going to be long otherwise.
@jond Huh! I didn't know that! Thanks to you (and @DialMforMara) now I do!

@jond Which is annoying if you have short urls in the first place that take less space like f.e. php.ug which is only 6 chars (12 if you include the scheme).

"shortening" that to 23 chars is a bit... counterproductive?...

@jond I'm hoping this becomes standard. Link shorteners in general are a good indicator that I'm probably being shown spam.

@jond

You might want to mention this to @nextclouders

Apparently as coders they can't figure out how to post to #Twitter and #Mastodon without using Twitters t.co link surveillance... 🤔

#privacy #nextcloud

@jond is that 23 characters per link? Or could you get a theoretically infinite number of links?

@jond what if the URL is already less than 23 characters?

curious because i have 9 domains where it's at least theoretically possible to have links shorter than that, not because i'm likely to ever find this information useful. :P

(i have boop.ws, puppy.ws, and awoo.onl among others)

@jond Very occasionally, long complex URLs proove difficult to parse (Google Books and Ngram links have done this for me). That's a case wherre a URL shortener may prove useful, not to shorten the URL but to make it parsable.

Mind, I don't have that excuse, as #GlitchSocial supports #Markdown and straight-up #HTML, enabling me to created formatted links of pretty much unlimited complexity.

Plus no 500 character limits 😺

Doc Edward Morbius ⭕​ (@[email protected])

17.1K Posts, 616 Following, 2.65K Followers · Space Alien Cat / Technological Archaeologist Supervintage Progress, models, institutions, technology, limits, values. Interactions thereof. https://old.reddit.com/r/dredmorbius https://joindiaspora.com/u/dredmorbius Administrivia: https://toot.cat/@dredmorbius/104371572777073267 Commas: Oxford

Toot.Cat
@jond the only reason I find for shorteners is to actually create a meaningful name for something like a random document URL. But other than that, they are problematic.
@jond just curious, how do links shorteners break the web? Something new to learn for me!
@jond Did you know that you don’t need to use 500 characters in #toots when 200 is sufficient?