There's no legitimate reason to use URL shorteners. It's only if you want to hide malware, tracking links, referral links, etc - none of which benefit the user.

Re: Google's link shortener is officially dead

Post by Nextgrid » Sat, Mar 30, 2019, 9:58 PM UTC

onetimemanytime wrote: post #2

Curious: any idea how much would it cost to run a year?

Probably not that much, there's not much processing power involved nor bandwidth used (it's really just serving 301 redirects). A bare-metal dedicated server should handle quite a bit of traffic and remain cost effective (compared to their "cloud" equivalents).

Post reply on HN