Eureka! (Re: Comments on Python Redesign)

[Peter Hansen]

Skip Montanaro wrote:
> 
>     Dave> I don't know of any problem with tinyurls - *any* server can
>     Dave> provide a "bad" redirect; as with any URL whether or not you
>     Dave> follow it depends on the context and on how much you trust the
>     Dave> sender.
> 
> The only other reasons I could think of to object to tiny urls are:
> 
> * Perhaps the tinyurl folks are not trustworthy (are they keeping track of
>   your browsing habits and selling that info?).  That seems unlikely, since
>   they don't appear to be storing cookies in my browser.
> 
> * The tinyurl website can become a bottleneck, preventing people from
>   getting where they want to go.  The tinyurl.com website seems to be fairly
>   unreachable for me at the moment, though this is the first time I've seen
>   this, and it appears to be a problem more with Northwestern's connection
>   to the net than tinyurl.com's.
> 
> * There's no guarantee tiny urls will remain unique or even available for
>   long periods of time.  Their current practice of using four lower-case
>   letters suggests they have space for about 450,000 unique URLs before
>   extending to a fifth letter.

* You can't tell ahead of time what site you are going to be redirected to.
  As a result, you lose complete freedom to choose whether or not you should
  follow the link.  (Note for the imprecise: I didn't say you completely lose
  freedom, I said you lose complete freedom.)

-Peter