Closed. This question is off-topic. It is not currently accepting answers.
Want to improve this question? Update the question so it's on-topic for Stack Overflow.
Closed 10 years ago.
Improve this question
The web site in question is www.eventid.net; my web based app will redirect the user to the site and send an event id in the url. The redirect will be: http://www.eventid.net/display.asp?eventid=1003&source=Microsoft-Windows-Security-Licensing-SLC
Do you think I can do this?
I have contacted the site owners with no reply.
It's a public website, of course you can.
It'd be a different matter if you were screen-scraping their results for your own application, but from your description that's not the case.
If you were operating a web site in Germany, and your site had a deep link to a Stackoverflow article, and that article contained copyrighted code from a German company (posted by an employee, for instance), that company could easily get you in trouble at any German court.
US courts have been much more lenient, so if you are doing business solely in the US, I would not worry too much, as long as you don't violate the Terms of Use here.
So, I think the answer "Of course, it is a public site" does not do justice to the potentially complicated legal issues that can arise when you take the question into an international context.
Some examples (only the big ones make it into English language news):
http://www.linksandlaw.com/courtdecisions-germany.htm
http://www.theregister.co.uk/2005/04/11/heise_not_allowed_to_mention_slysoft/
http://news.cnet.com/8301-1023_3-10064740-93.html
Read through their Terms of Use carefully. Make sure you avoid violating their trademark. If it's not clear that you are redirecting to an external site, you may want to make it clear so your users aren't confused.
Related
Closed. This question does not meet Stack Overflow guidelines. It is not currently accepting answers.
This question does not appear to be about programming within the scope defined in the help center.
Closed 6 years ago.
Improve this question
I am working with a company that is trying to build their online authority and they want to avoid any penalties from Google and other major search engines.
The site is a social network (adult related) and users can create public profile, post links, images, etc. It is an adult social network for people that want to make money talking on the phone.
So the question is, is it a good idea to nofollow all external links? Because it is hard to gauge the quality of sites that we may be linking out to and I don't want to have any issues with this..
Thanks!
This article on Google suggests you should nofollow untrusted user links.
If you can't or don't want to vouch for the content of pages you link
to from your site — for example, untrusted user comments or guestbook
entries — you should nofollow those links. This can discourage
spammers from targeting your site, and will help keep your site from
inadvertently passing PageRank to bad neighborhoods on the web.
I'd probably keep your own links as follow, and make some effort to seek out and remove dodgy links, though - nofollow does not protect your users.
The safe route would be, yes, to add nofollow to all of your outgoing links if you're going to allow users to be able to insert any link they wish.
A lot of large social networks and forums do this and have no issues.
I hope this helps some.
Closed. This question is not about programming or software development. It is not currently accepting answers.
This question does not appear to be about a specific programming problem, a software algorithm, or software tools primarily used by programmers. If you believe the question would be on-topic on another Stack Exchange site, you can leave a comment to explain where the question may be able to be answered.
Closed 20 hours ago.
Improve this question
I keep seeing different kinds of Amazon affiliate links and I don’t understand why.
What’s the difference between the following? Why make the longer URL?
(From the Amazon link guide):
http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/B00005JG32/davetaylor
http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B00005JG32/ref=cm_lm_fullview_prod_3/102-2173641-6432913?_encoding=UTF8&v=glance
The bottom URL actually isn't an affiliate link. The /ref= part of the url is used by Amazon internally to track how users get to products on their site. The ?tag= query string is what identifies affiliation.
https://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/B00005JG32/davetaylor
https://www.amazon.com/dp/B00005JG32?tag=davetaylor
The below option is actually shorter and cleaner when the unnecessary parts of the URL are removed.
Amazon's canonical URL format is:
https://www.amazon.com/{product-title-keywords}/dp/{$ASIN}
In this case, it would be:
https://www.amazon.com/Hasbro-40224-Disney-Monopoly/dp/B00005JG32
When you go to the page's source code, you will see it on a line of code that says:
<link rel="canonical" href="https://www.amazon.com/Hasbro-40224-Disney-Monopoly/dp/B00005JG32" />
Any other link is an addition to or an abstraction of the canonical URL.
Now, you have more power to choose a URL format that serves you best.
Depending on your use cases, you might also want to consider using an Amazon link shortener or link obfuscator before publishing your Amazon URLs.
There doesn't seem to be any non-technical difference. The less cluttered link still starts the shopping session as usual.
Closed. This question is off-topic. It is not currently accepting answers.
Want to improve this question? Update the question so it's on-topic for Stack Overflow.
Closed 11 years ago.
Improve this question
I see in many sites the use of short links like this:
http://www.chipbennett.net/2011/04/28/2011-nfl-draft-colts-round-1/
to this
http://bit.ly/mxytw8
but I wonder to know why they've been used!
The only thing I could imagine is to hide the original link or to gain data weight in a database?
Simply because services like Twitter are limited in the message size. Or to make it easier to type in the address instead of copy/pasting. Could also be misused by spammers or phishing attacks to hide the real address. See http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/URL_shortening
The user may be doing it to take advantage of link tracking provided by bitly.
Every bitly link has an info page, which reveals the number of related clicks and other relevant data. You can get to the info page in a few different ways.
They're mostly used with Twitter (which has a very short message size) and historically for plain text email where mail readers would line-wrap long URLs in the middle.
Closed. This question is off-topic. It is not currently accepting answers.
Want to improve this question? Update the question so it's on-topic for Stack Overflow.
Closed 12 years ago.
The community reviewed whether to reopen this question 9 months ago and left it closed:
Original close reason(s) were not resolved
Improve this question
Does it mean that user requests directing to the different servers?
I usually see it on websites with high traffic.
for eg:- https://www.tcs.com/
https://www2.deloitte.com/
This is largely speculative, but generally each of the www'n's is simply a different web server, which a given user has been routed to either manually (for example all images might live on www2, etc.) or by some form of up-stream round robin system or load-balancer, both of which tend to use some component of the end user's IP address or similar to ensure that a user's session will remain on a given server.
Incidentally, more modern implementations will hide the existence of multiple servers behind a single 'www', so that this is less visible/intrusive.
It doesn’t technically mean anything in particular — domains read right-to-left, so for everything to the left of a company’s domain, it’s up to the company what each bit means. (“www”, for example, is just a conventional subdomain for the web site of the company.)
I‘ve no personal experience of what www1, www2 et al are commonly used for in practice. It might well be different servers, although to my mind that’s exposing implementation details at the interface level, and is thus a bad idea.
As an example, PHP's website (at least for documentation) will forward requests to different subdomains. For example, if I go to php.net/echo, I am directed to either us2.php.net or us3.php.net. For the PHP website, it does appear that each subdomain represents a different server, but this is not necessarily the case.
Closed. This question is off-topic. It is not currently accepting answers.
Want to improve this question? Update the question so it's on-topic for Stack Overflow.
Closed 9 years ago.
Improve this question
I am developing a site for a client and they currently own two domains.
howafarms.com and grassfedbeeffl.net
The current site has howafarms.com traffic forward straight to grassfedbeeffl.net. My question is.. which one should I use as the main url and which should I forward. Normal logic tells me howafarms.com should be the main url. But... from an SEO standpoint, I will already be winning the battle in google rankings if someone types howafarms.. so the added weight from the domain wont be very effective. On the other hand, if I use grassfedbeefl.net, I think the benefit from those words in that domain will help SEO quiet a bit more.
What is your opinion on this?
Google does give a bigger weight to EMD (exact match domains). It has been proven numerous times that ranking an EMD is much easier than non EMD.
If "how a farms" is a popular search term, then choosing howafarms.com is better choice than grassfedbeeffl.net. However, if people are searching "how farms" instead "how a farms" then howafarms.com adds no great value to your SEO campaign. Because it is no longer considered EMD.
Just to give you an example, try to search "seo tips" in Google search. Notice how many EMD are sitting at the top results? In spite them having a poor content. On the other hand quality sites which give you real SEO Tips are buried far away in Google search, just because they are not EMD and have to work harder.
In my somewhat qualified opinion there is really no need to change a domain name for SEO reasons. Google really couldn't care less what your domain name states because a domain name is no indication of content quality.
The only benefit that should concern you is the benefit to the user. If you think one domain will benefit users then go with that one, otherwise don't change a website to manipulate metrics no one outside of Google truly understands.