PSA on privuhcy
-
Everything after the ? can be safely removed
This is usually true but but not always. There's often times when a URL query like that is used to choose the page to load. I believe wordpress does this
WordPress uses a taxonomic system you choose with a mix of the Settings page and how you organize your template hierarchy. To my knowledge there is no out of the box query url functionality in the core system.
-
Yep!
Only thing I want to see after a ? in a youtube url is t=4m20s
personally i like v=aO82NftCga to be in there as well
-
Only on "I have really bad SEO" kinds of blogs. Query strings have been considered a negative thing for many many years.
whuh? querystrings are integral to things like pagination. they are by no means a negative thing.
-
ClearURLs was my go to on Firefox, I think it's still great but it gave me trouble on a couple of sites because it modified the url in the address bar (it was like AliExpress and shopee, Chinese e-commerce sites that look like a web dev vomited, so I hardly blame ClearURLs)
Firefox also now has "copy clean link" when you right click the url bar which also works great.
Firefox also now has “copy clean link” when you right click the url bar which also works great.
I am an avid and exclusive user of Firefox and I never discovered this because it never would have occurred to me in a million years to right click the URL bar for any reason. So I'll be damned; there it is. (I always just lasso the relevant part myself and hit ctrl + c.)
-
WordPress uses a taxonomic system you choose with a mix of the Settings page and how you organize your template hierarchy. To my knowledge there is no out of the box query url functionality in the core system.
There is.
?s=for a search, and you can combine it with other parameters such as date or taxonomy terms. -
whuh? querystrings are integral to things like pagination. they are by no means a negative thing.
wrote last edited by [email protected]I wouldn't call it integral, pagination query parameters can be in the url params just as easily as in the querystring
-
This post did not contain any content.
-
XcQ all the way!
wrote last edited by [email protected]“XcQ, LINK STAYS BLUE!”
-
So annoying to always have to find out how far you can trim a URL before it breaks.
wrote last edited by [email protected]There should be an extension that does this
-
This post did not contain any content.wrote last edited by [email protected]
If you're still using firefox, right click -> copy clean link. works most of the time.
edit: on desktop, idk if mobile supports it or not. Good suggestions below though for mobile.
-
This post did not contain any content.
I usually just do it because shorter links look better than 30 lines of crap
-
This post did not contain any content.
Brave for iOS has the Copy Clean Link option. There’s GNAT Cleaner from the App Store but I’ve never used it.
I tried adding screenshots but I haven’t been able to upload photos in almost a week.
-
I wouldn't call it integral, pagination query parameters can be in the url params just as easily as in the querystring
that's very hard to make idiomatic, and if it's in the querystring it's easier to change manually because you can annotate each entry more easily.
-
This post did not contain any content.
hey you, yeah you, you're finally awake
-
This post did not contain any content.
I just use Firefox focus
-
This post did not contain any content.
So how about when a link is shared on Lemmy or Reddit or FB? Do the latter strip out the identifiers, or does that one person's reshared post associate them with the clicks of thousands of others?
For web links, they'd also be able to find the source from the referrer tags etc
-
I wouldn't call it integral, pagination query parameters can be in the url params just as easily as in the querystring
Pagination query params can be in the URL params, but that’s not normal at all. They’re pretty much always use query params, and it’s very reasonable to do so. Filtering, search, and pagination all typically go in query params.
-
I usually just do it because shorter links look better than 30 lines of crap
Right? The fact that this is an extra bit of tracking information I don't want makes this an easy sell for anyone looking for a reason to do this, but for me it's because it just makes links uglier.
-
I'm upset, the tech and privacy communities need to step it up cause I've never seen this fact. I kinda knew URLs had a lot of junk, but I never knew what could be removed.
The way I've always figured it out is by deleting some, then loading the page in a different browser or an incognito window, and repeat until the URL is as minimal as possible, while still loading correctly. For websites you use regularly, you'll figure it out pretty quickly.
-
There are many URLs that require parameters to load a resource (and aren’t necessarily tracking anything). With YouTube’s non-shortened links (for example), the video ID is after the
?, but is usually (but not always) immediately after.This:
https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=dQw4w9WgXcQCan be shortened to:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dQw4w9WgXcQBut no shorter.
(actually, you can remove the
www.but that’s not relevant for illustrating my point)LOL: thank you Voyager or Lemmy.world for stripping it even from my inline code.
Here’s what I was trying to post:
Nice try.
