In some cases the size of the URL matters. No matter if that's a human who doesn't want their reading flow interrupted by a link that covers three lines in mobile view (hence why linkedin or printed magazines operate shorteners), a user who legitimately types in links in cases where copy-paste isn't an obvious solution (e.g. typing a link you see on a stranger's device, like a party game or the link on a bluescreen, or again links in print), or you want to create a QR code that's readable from a distance and doesn't have 8 alignment squares.
I would get behind the argument that there aren't good use cases for 3rd party url shorteners. A url shortener should preferably be operated by the target website (like youtu.be), and failing that be operated by the originator of the link (linked.in, t.co, time.com).
Comments
In some cases the size of the URL matters. No matter if that's a human who doesn't want their reading flow interrupted by a link that covers three lines in mobile view (hence why linkedin or printed magazines operate shorteners), a user who legitimately types in links in cases where copy-paste isn't an obvious solution (e.g. typing a link you see on a stranger's device, like a party game or the link on a bluescreen, or again links in print), or you want to create a QR code that's readable from a distance and doesn't have 8 alignment squares.
I would get behind the argument that there aren't good use cases for 3rd party url shorteners. A url shortener should preferably be operated by the target website (like youtu.be), and failing that be operated by the originator of the link (linked.in, t.co, time.com).