That's Only Ten Lines Of Code
avc.com
avc.com
The reason why bit.ly's triviality is a reason to worry about its future is not that it is short. It is that there is no defensible competitive moat -- they're primarily parasiting their users off another popular service (Twitter) who could obliterate them as a side effect of an engineering change which would be mostly unremarkable. (e.g. "Our front-end now auto-crunches URLs to internal twitter ones, complete with analytics.")
There is also no compelling reason for people to pay for their service or their data -- the notion that the second has any value at all appears to primarily be bubble thinking utterly disconnected to any actual experience of selling data. (A few hundred people -- can't quite tell you who, but they're out there -- like computerized voices which sound like Hannah Montana, as demonstrated by the response to this tweet. Shazam! Pay me money.)
source? not sure that's totally true. (maybe for tinyurl, which twitter uses automatically, but bit.ly?)
Copy/paste each link into their search page, then click "info", and you'll see where the users are clicking them.
Edit: oh wait. In the top 10:
Email Clients, IM, AIR Apps, and Direct
Direct Traffic includes people clicking a bit.ly link from:
- Desktop email clients like Microsoft Outlook or Apple mail
- AIR applications like Tweetdeck or Twirhl
- Mobile apps like Twitterific or Blackberry Mail
- Chat apps like AIM
- SMS/MMS messages
It also includes people who typed a bit.ly link directly into their browser
seems to be 10x of twitter.com, so it's not easy to say that most of that is API traffic from Twitter clients, then.
So, then, no substantial evidence. I'm just curious whether it is a good assumption that twitter provides most of the traffic for all URL shortners, or not. Perhaps the people that run URL shortners can comment?
With bit.ly it doesn't matter at all if I use the same URL shortening service they use or not. The second something better comes along, or Twitter decides to switch to something else, or they attempt to monetize it by inserting ads or something there will be a mass exodus.
Of course there's always the possibility that the bit.ly folks pitched some grand vision we don't know about to their investors.
On a related note, I have a feeling our reliance on URL shortening services is going to bite us in the ass in the future. When one of these service goes out of business you're left with thousands or millions of essentially dangling pointers. It also throws a monkey wrench into PageRank type algorithms.
Edit: Yes, I'm being facetious in poking fun at Microsoft.
Microsoft is evil but it's not incompetent. Sometimes it even puts its market dominance to good use; MS whipped hardware vendors into shape and gave us a truly uniform PC platform with Plug and Play.
http://research.microsoft.com/en-us/um/cambridge/projects/au...
BTW, you can blame Microsoft all you want, but they're the ones holding 90% of the desktop market, not our Macs and Linux PCs. Their consumer products might not be top-notch, but they did many things right - things which Apple and Sun and Linux vendors failed to do.
My summary: http://www.squeezedbooks.com/book/show/10/in-search-of-stupi...
A billion links linking to nowhere...
If Libya were to return to such lists, would using a bit.ly URL to link to advanced encryption code be a federal offense?