“Oh By” Is the Universal Shortener(0x.co)
0x.co
“Oh By” Is the Universal Shortener
https://0x.co/index.html
13 comments
Hi - a few things...
First, URL shortening is not what this tool is for.
It will function as a URL shortener if you put in a URL and tell it to, but again - that's not what it was built for.
Second, I tend to agree with the notion that URL shorteners are "bad for the web". So, since we happen to have a (secondary) URL shortening function, I did two things:
1. Made a commitment with actual resources to keep 0x.co running forever.[1]
2. Had a short discussion with my friend Jason Scott[2][3] about giving Internet Archive and Archive Team an easy port for download/archiving. In our conversation he reiterated his (well known) position that URL shorteners are bad in general, but less terrible if there is a published (and maintained) spec for data exfiltration.
But again ... URL shortening is NOT what this tool is for.
[1] simple, lightweight pages combined with massive, leftover rsync.net bandwidth/hosting resources make this trivial.
[2] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jason_Scott
[3] http://ascii.textfiles.com/
First, URL shortening is not what this tool is for.
It will function as a URL shortener if you put in a URL and tell it to, but again - that's not what it was built for.
Second, I tend to agree with the notion that URL shorteners are "bad for the web". So, since we happen to have a (secondary) URL shortening function, I did two things:
1. Made a commitment with actual resources to keep 0x.co running forever.[1]
2. Had a short discussion with my friend Jason Scott[2][3] about giving Internet Archive and Archive Team an easy port for download/archiving. In our conversation he reiterated his (well known) position that URL shorteners are bad in general, but less terrible if there is a published (and maintained) spec for data exfiltration.
But again ... URL shortening is NOT what this tool is for.
[1] simple, lightweight pages combined with massive, leftover rsync.net bandwidth/hosting resources make this trivial.
[2] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jason_Scott
[3] http://ascii.textfiles.com/
Yes, this is not a URL shortener per se, although it can obviously be used as such.
Sad story, but I worked for a company named Netword exactly two decades ago that was going to do this in a big way, even got one of the major SV investment firms, Hambrecht & Quist, very interested (and their in with Netscape, who they helped take public, would have been important), as in, we launched, and they came to us....
But it was killed by devil investors who due to previous resource misallocations and bad risk management (MPV, MPV, MVP!!!) had gotten their hooks into the company about the time I started there. Weird and nasty denouncement, 13 of us resigned in masse one day from our lawyer's office, we had to fight to get our last paychecks (something state government enforcement agencies have no humor about at all), etc. etc.
It a very good idea, I think, and who knows, maybe it's time has come. Mr. rsync (who I'm a very happy customer of (http://www.ancell-ent.com/1715_Rex_Ave_127B_Joplin/images/ )), you're welcome to drop me an email check my info) for what we figured out in that effort.
Note that we were going to do "Networds(TM)", as in "Intel annual report", obviously one thing that made this less important was the increasing quality of search engines. This isn't quite the same thing....
Sad story, but I worked for a company named Netword exactly two decades ago that was going to do this in a big way, even got one of the major SV investment firms, Hambrecht & Quist, very interested (and their in with Netscape, who they helped take public, would have been important), as in, we launched, and they came to us....
But it was killed by devil investors who due to previous resource misallocations and bad risk management (MPV, MPV, MVP!!!) had gotten their hooks into the company about the time I started there. Weird and nasty denouncement, 13 of us resigned in masse one day from our lawyer's office, we had to fight to get our last paychecks (something state government enforcement agencies have no humor about at all), etc. etc.
It a very good idea, I think, and who knows, maybe it's time has come. Mr. rsync (who I'm a very happy customer of (http://www.ancell-ent.com/1715_Rex_Ave_127B_Joplin/images/ )), you're welcome to drop me an email check my info) for what we figured out in that effort.
Note that we were going to do "Networds(TM)", as in "Intel annual report", obviously one thing that made this less important was the increasing quality of search engines. This isn't quite the same thing....
First of all, thanks for being our customer (at rsync.net, that is).
Yes, I'll email to hear your story - it would be interesting.
I think the key to what I'm trying to do here is keeping the product, and the interface, extremely stripped down and simple - which causes costs to drop dramatically (in terms of hosting, bandwidth, server costs, etc.).
Not having any advertisements or tracking or third party hooks, etc., makes that much easier - and makes for a much nicer product. The revenue model is selling custom codes, so you are not the product. The codes are.
Yes, I'll email to hear your story - it would be interesting.
I think the key to what I'm trying to do here is keeping the product, and the interface, extremely stripped down and simple - which causes costs to drop dramatically (in terms of hosting, bandwidth, server costs, etc.).
Not having any advertisements or tracking or third party hooks, etc., makes that much easier - and makes for a much nicer product. The revenue model is selling custom codes, so you are not the product. The codes are.
The revenue model is selling custom codes, so you are not the product. The codes are.
That, BTW, was the business model of Netword, and in those gold rush days it worked very well. Today, resources are so cheap it ought to work as well, even if it doesn't really take off.
And you're welcome, and again, thanks for saving my email etc. from a tornado....
That, BTW, was the business model of Netword, and in those gold rush days it worked very well. Today, resources are so cheap it ought to work as well, even if it doesn't really take off.
And you're welcome, and again, thanks for saving my email etc. from a tornado....
"Smaller services, with no culpable business behind them"
Just to reiterate, we've been offering cloud storage since 2001 (under the rsync.net name since 2006) and the resources needed to operate "Oh By" are trivial.
You have my personal commitment to continue running "Oh By', in perpetuity, regardless of revenue.
It may interest you to know that our network connectivity agreements/relationships in Denver (one of our locations) predate google.[1]
[1] Yep, the bandwidth co-op, DenverOnline, etc.
Just to reiterate, we've been offering cloud storage since 2001 (under the rsync.net name since 2006) and the resources needed to operate "Oh By" are trivial.
You have my personal commitment to continue running "Oh By', in perpetuity, regardless of revenue.
It may interest you to know that our network connectivity agreements/relationships in Denver (one of our locations) predate google.[1]
[1] Yep, the bandwidth co-op, DenverOnline, etc.
How should someone unfamiliar with Oh By realize that the string "0x7DBZ3G" is a thing they can look up? Is your plan to get sufficient popularity that people will recognize them like they recognize URLs?
IIRC, the "Visit us on the World Wide Web at aitch tee tee pee colon slash slash" days lasted quite a while. (Not to mention the "colon backslash backslash" days.) I don't think I can just write "0x7DBZ3G" today (but maybe in a few years!); I'd have to write some reference to http://0x.co/.
IIRC, the "Visit us on the World Wide Web at aitch tee tee pee colon slash slash" days lasted quite a while. (Not to mention the "colon backslash backslash" days.) I don't think I can just write "0x7DBZ3G" today (but maybe in a few years!); I'd have to write some reference to http://0x.co/.
"Is your plan to get sufficient popularity that people will recognize them like they recognize URLs?"
Yes, that is indeed the plan, and yes, that will be a challenge.
That's why we chose that domain name and that sort-of-phonetical-mouthing of it ...
Yes, that is indeed the plan, and yes, that will be a challenge.
That's why we chose that domain name and that sort-of-phonetical-mouthing of it ...
Don't think of this as a url shortener, my use case would be something like pastebin or gist but with free private anonymous pastes. It also took me all of 2 minutes to get a python implementation working with the API. One suggestion, when I look up the codes if I include the 0x eg. "0xDV2HW7" or "0 x DV2HW7" it fails to lookup the code - it wasn't immediately obvious to me to discard the 0x on lookup.
Hmmm .... we have it coded to accept either:
http://0x.co/EXAMPLE
or:
http://0x.co/0xEXAMPLE
... so I wonder, how are you doing the lookup that it is failing without the 0x ?
EDIT: OH, ACTUALLY - are you looking up "0 x EXAMPLE", with the spaces in there ? No, that won't work - we just have the spaces in place on the webpage to make it easy on the eyes ... is that what you're doing ?
edit: and for anyone reading, you can do the lookup even simpler with plain old 'nc' - you can specify http:// (non SSL) address if you need to ...
http://0x.co/EXAMPLE
or:
http://0x.co/0xEXAMPLE
... so I wonder, how are you doing the lookup that it is failing without the 0x ?
EDIT: OH, ACTUALLY - are you looking up "0 x EXAMPLE", with the spaces in there ? No, that won't work - we just have the spaces in place on the webpage to make it easy on the eyes ... is that what you're doing ?
edit: and for anyone reading, you can do the lookup even simpler with plain old 'nc' - you can specify http:// (non SSL) address if you need to ...
I'm typing 0x4PJGX8 into the lookup form at https://0x.co/index.html and it fails, https://0x.co/0x4PJGX8 does indeed route correctly.
Fixed - thank you.
Question not covered by the FAQ: for the mathematically lazy, what kind of size are we looking at in terms of "oh by" code space? How many documents can be stored until codes become too long to store in the (human) working memory?
Will there be an option to generate a code "long enough" that it can not easily be brute force guessed?
Will there be an option to generate a code "long enough" that it can not easily be brute force guessed?
Right now, as in, launch day, we are handing out 6 character codes that are 0-9,A-Z (but excluding '0', 'o', 'x', '1' and 'l') ... so 31^6 codes.
But you can purchase a custom code[1] and the price is based on the length (shorter being more expensive) and the max size is 32 characters.
So you can choose what you like, and it's as low as $8/year if it's 9 characters or longer...
[1] https://0x.co/custom.html
But you can purchase a custom code[1] and the price is based on the length (shorter being more expensive) and the max size is 32 characters.
So you can choose what you like, and it's as low as $8/year if it's 9 characters or longer...
[1] https://0x.co/custom.html
There is an "HN FAQ" which we think addresses things HN folks will be interested in, as opposed to the "civilian" FAQ.
Not at all related to rsync.net, but yes, I'm the rsync.net guy.
Happy to answer questions here.
Not at all related to rsync.net, but yes, I'm the rsync.net guy.
Happy to answer questions here.
Not working on Opera 12.16 (last Presto engine).
Not working on Chromium 37
So. https://www.ssllabs.com/ssltest/analyze.html?d=0x.co - and apache behind...
So. https://www.ssllabs.com/ssltest/analyze.html?d=0x.co - and apache behind...
The time that is displayed should include the timezone. No idea what timezone it's in, but it definitely isn't UTC.
Another curious rsync.net customer taking a look.
I think you're actually offering a key-value store (aaS) with a 4 KB maximum page size, and one of the use cases happens to be a text/URL shortener.
It looks like someone is squatting on ox.co. You could contact them and hope they haven't seen your project yet..
How are the codes derived?
I think you're actually offering a key-value store (aaS) with a 4 KB maximum page size, and one of the use cases happens to be a text/URL shortener.
It looks like someone is squatting on ox.co. You could contact them and hope they haven't seen your project yet..
How are the codes derived?
"Another curious rsync.net customer taking a look."
Thanks for being our customer (at rsync.net).
"How are the codes derived?"
Right now we are handing out random (free) codes that are 6 characters long, but at some point I suppose we have to increase to 7 ... like ICQ ...
Thanks for being our customer (at rsync.net).
"How are the codes derived?"
# generate the ohby code
use String::Random;
my $pattern = new String::Random;
my $size = 6;
# don't use i,I,1,l,L,0,O,X,x etc..
$pattern->{'A'} = [ 'A'..'H', 'J', 'K', 'M', 'N', 'P'..'W', 'Y' .. 'Z', '2'..'9' ];
my $code = $pattern->randpattern('A' x $size);
Right now we are handing out random (free) codes that are 6 characters long, but at some point I suppose we have to increase to 7 ... like ICQ ...
It seems like a bad choice of domain, given the example usage. "0x" will be regularly confused with "ox", and ox.co is a completely different site.
What does the public/private option do?
At some point (not now) we will present existing codes as a searchable resource from the outside. I haven't decided what that presentation layer will look like, but the idea is that a lot of Oh By Codes will contain important or helpful information and benefit from being searchable.
But some won't. So if you want to keep the content of your code private/unindexed/norobots, you would set that flag to "private".
I think the expiration pick-list is self-explanatory, yes ?
But some won't. So if you want to keep the content of your code private/unindexed/norobots, you would set that flag to "private".
I think the expiration pick-list is self-explanatory, yes ?
Do you provide a .onion address?
If you insist on using one, use one that is owned and maintained by a massive, stable company, like Google[3]. Smaller services, with no culpable business behind them, tend to die off[4][5].
1. https://www.schneier.com/blog/archives/2016/04/security_risk...
2. https://t37.net/why-link-shorteners-harm-your-readers-and-de...
3. https://goo.gl
4. http://www.webpronews.com/study-claims-61-of-url-shorteners-...
5. https://bit.do/list-of-url-shorteners.php