it is relatively simple and inexpensive to operate and there is no reason it can’t continue operating into the indefinite future.
I disagree with the op on one major point… They suggest that the proper way for a service like this to operate is with a public database of links…
However, when I think of all of the different ways, one might use a shorter, it seems obvious that many links would necessarily be sensitive and/or private.
Therefore, I consider myself to have a dual mandate: privacy of the links created, and a duty, that I have assumed, of running the service for decades.
I think that's fair. 301works.org[0], for example, requires its members to upload their DB to Internet Archive, but IA keeps it private. They then ask for the technical control of the domain to be transferred 301works.org in the event of the site's closure so they can continue serving the traffic.
I do think that, however, that a service can keep their DB public _iff_ users know that's the case before creating links. Often times, folks are just shortening public links, but it is true that people sometimes share "private" links (e.g., Google Doc private links, etc...) which shouldn't be enumerated.
it is relatively simple and inexpensive to operate and there is no reason it can’t continue operating into the indefinite future.
I disagree with the op on one major point… They suggest that the proper way for a service like this to operate is with a public database of links…
However, when I think of all of the different ways, one might use a shorter, it seems obvious that many links would necessarily be sensitive and/or private.
Therefore, I consider myself to have a dual mandate: privacy of the links created, and a duty, that I have assumed, of running the service for decades.