

Tell HN: Add a '+' to the end of any bit.ly link to get the full URL. - sp332

Not enough people know this.  If you're wary of a bit.ly link from a stranger, just add a "+" to the end.  This will take you to a bit.ly page that has the full URL and a list of how many people have clicked it, who's tweeted it and when, etc.  Also, if you're sharing a link, you could just add the + yourself to make it a bit less opaque. e.g. this link to Diaspora's Kickstarter page: http://bit.ly/dgpnNs+
======
imp
I prefer to nag people to not use shorteners at all if you're not on Twitter.
I don't know if it works, but I feel that it's a habit that needs to stop.

~~~
fizz972
I also wish Twitter would allow 1 link per tweet as part of the tweet's
general metadata and not count it in the characters restriction.

Shortened links are annoying and misleading, I've been wasting too much time
clicking links I've seen already and links to sites I just don't like.

~~~
rick_2047
In your suggestion you fail to consider what prompted the 140 char
restriction. The source of that restriction was that tweeter wanted the main
source of tweets to be mobiles, using SMS. Now we can argue that they can
allow people posting from the web to add some metadata but that would result
in the inconsistency between the web and mobile protocols.

~~~
fizz972
I think that nowdays the 140 char restriction is for keeping Twitter clean and
readable, making it harder on the writer and easier on the reader - links are
not hard to read and therefore there is no reason to restrict their length.

Also, users who actually use Twitter via SMS would probably not be capable of
viewing the link anyhow so it could just say "(+lnk)" or something.

~~~
steveklabnik
I used to manually type bit.ly links in from a tweet via SMS all the time. I
didn't have a smartphone until a few weeks ago, and it was easier than opening
twitter, typing in my password, finding the person's tweet, and clicking on
it.

~~~
fizz972
Another possible solution - having the URL shortened by Twitter when sending
to SMS users.

~~~
steveklabnik
It's true. Overall, I feel like Twitter is better this way. Constraints force
you to be creative.

------
uuid
De-referencing short urls is a pain.

<http://www.longurlplease.com/> is quite nice.

Bookmarklet, FF extension, and a JSON API. I've used the API, and it was a
pleasant experience.

~~~
elidourado
I wrote a Chrome extension that uses their API, but beware that their API does
go down from time to time.

[https://chrome.google.com/extensions/detail/ecnmdlgmbjkiikea...](https://chrome.google.com/extensions/detail/ecnmdlgmbjkiikeaiphjeeglgfcnlfgo)

------
RiderOfGiraffes
Here's a flip side.

When I see a link I like and I want to pass it on to others, using bit.ly lets
me track how many people follow it. If I just give out the link directly I
have no idea how much effect my recommendation has had.

This is especially useful when recommending things for business. Already I've
seent aht one way of recommending things is getting far more attention than
another. Without some sort of tracking I would've known.

It's much more of an effort for me to put up some sort of referring system via
other methods I can track - bit/ly provides me with this for free, both in
terms of effort and money.

~~~
imp
1) You're potentially breaking the web because those links you're posting
aren't guaranteed to last forever.

2) By posting bitly links, you're encouraging people to click on shortened
links. Shortened links can be used to disguise malware, viruses, etc.

3) I don't feel that you have the right to know how many people click on a
link on a domain you don't own.

~~~
RiderOfGiraffes
I don't deny any of that, I'm just saying that there are advantages.

For stuff I care about long term I put a reference on my own site, and I
either cache the target page myself, of record enough of it that a Google
search is likely to find something similar. That way I can fix it if it
breaks.

For stuff that I don't care about beyond three months, why should I bother?
OK, perhaps I should bother because of the potential for malware, etc, and I
recognise that, but for me, the benefits outweigh the disadvantages.

If you think this is wrong, offer me a service that makes my life easier,
otherwise all you're doing is saying "Don't do that."

And I'm not sure that I don't have at least some right to know how many people
click on a link that I've provided, even if it's to someone else's domain. If
I can get that information, and it's of use to me, why should I not do it?

Finally, I'm not talking about the links on my domains. For them I use long
references. I'm talking about links provided in SMS, Facebook IM, twitter, and
other similar media. I don't really see how providing short links there are
"breaking the web" and would be interested in an clarification you'd care to
offer.

(edited within minutes for typos and clarification.)

------
prakashk
I use the Greasemonkey userscript 'TinyURL Decoder'
(<http://userscripts.org/scripts/show/40582>) which automatically decodes the
tiny URLs on a page. Very useful on twitter (which the script has out-of-the-
box support).

------
jaxn
The vast majority of URL shorteners return the full URL with a HEAD request.
Not practical for everyone, but the best way to do it if writing a service
that might consume shortened URLs.

------
pook
is.gd uses an appended - to throw you to a preview page, as well.

------
adolph
Hmm, now I need a js bookmarklet to toggle appending + signs on pages...

------
grandalf
pr0n.ly uses /stats after the URL to show stats. But unfortunately it's being
shut down for being un-Islamic.

