this post was submitted on 19 Jul 2024
250 points (99.2% liked)
Technology
59311 readers
6258 users here now
This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.
Our Rules
- Follow the lemmy.world rules.
- Only tech related content.
- Be excellent to each another!
- Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
- Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
- Politics threads may be removed.
- No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
- Only approved bots from the list below, to ask if your bot can be added please contact us.
- Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed
Approved Bots
founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
Google shuts down a lot of things, and usually there is nothing to do and parts of the internet break forever. But...I feel like this is one that would be cheap and at least possible to mitigate without Google's help.
Crawl for all goo.gl links prior to the 2025 shutdown, cache and enter the link and the redirect link into a database, and create a simple open source in-line replacement extension for browsers that intercepts goo.gl links and replaces them with the real link. These are just URLs, so the database even for hundreds of thousands of entries shouldn't be huge.
I mean, I'm not going to do it, but...
Hundreds of thousands of entries would be negligible (at 1000 bytes average per entry, 500k entries would be half a gigabyte) but the issue is that a full archive would be around 36 billion entries (making that archive around 34 TB, but probably smaller because the average link size is likely much lower than 1000 characters).
Interesting - how do we know it's 36 billion entries? I just estimated that it hadn't been used that much based on almost never seeing anyone actually use it...
I don’t know for sure, but that’s the scale I would expect (billions) and the number came from https://www.seroundtable.com/google-goo-gl-urls-to-404-37758.html
Ah, yes, I'm off by a lot then, thanks!