The point of my post was that the title is editorialized. Am I allowed to say "Did you click the link"? Probably not. But, still, let me suggest that you click the link. Once you've clicked the link, compare the title of the page you find yourself on to the title posted here. Now you've compared them, ask yourself: are they the same? I just did this experiment myself, and the answer was: no. The title of the page at time of my click is this: "NewPipe - a free YouTube client". The title of the HN submission at the time I'm composing this message is this: "NewPipe: YouTube client without vertical videos and algorithmic feed".

We are oft implored, not only by our famous and much-valued dang, but also the other guy (whatever his name is. He does a great job too though), not to editorialize the titles by submitting submissions with titles other than the actual title. How can you tell if the submitted title is other than the actual title? That's easy. You read the one and read the other and compare the two and see if they're different. (Which is another way of restating the previous paragraph.) In this case: they are. (Or at least were at time of writing! Since you'll be reading this in the future.) Hence my complaint.

The vertical video thing? That was just my little joke. OF COURSE I KNOW THAT VERTICAL VIDEO MEANS PORTRAIT VIDEO. And, yes, I have visited youtube.com, and have had a big pile of portrait shorts shit up the feed, same as everybody else. I am not completely... wait, hang on. I am completely stupid. Because I thought it would be so obvious that it was a joke, that nobody would bother to quibble. They'd just chuckle at my attempt to amuse the reader, or roll their eyes at it and ignore it, and then go on to moan at me about some other part of my post. Though, reading my post again, more fool me perhaps. I guess I didn't leave people enough other material to complain about.

Sorry. I'll try to do better in future.