They all released videos at almost the exact same time, so even though I don’t care, I was made to care. Therefore, I’m inflicting that same pain on you. You’re welcome.

Mrwhosetheboss made a good point saying that the target audience for this thing are rich people who want phones that look flashy and can pay for them, but don’t care that they have worse specs than the less flashy ones at a similar price.

MKBHD called it the “S25 Ultra Lite”, which I thought was funny. He also brought up the issue of cooling. He additionally said that no one is asking for thin phones, although it seems that Apple has also bought into the idea that people want this, since it’s rumored that they want to release a thin iPhone this year.

Dave2D said that he tested the heat dissipation capacity of the phone and that it can handle itself well. Apparently it still somehow has a vapor chamber inside of it, as well as a wireless charger. Apparently it also has the smallest battery in the lineup, even though it doesn’t have the silicon carbon tech that is all the rage now. He made a good point though, namely that this could just be Samsung starting the trend so that the technology matures in a few years’ time.

All three of them mentioned that everyone uses cases these days, which immediately kills the whole purpose of buying a thin phone and losing out on better specs.

If you somehow have not gotten enough of tech YouTubers acting confused over Samsung launching a product that no one asked for, there’s also Techaltar and Tech Spurt. I recommend the latter for dirty British humor.

Picture explanation:

https://i.horizon.pics/tWovRax4kh.jpg

When I view my subscriptions page on YouTube, half the "videos" are recordings of completed streams, often 2+ hours in length. I'm not interested in watching these. For me, they're just pollution in the feed.

Apparently, a lot of the channels I subscribe to, whose videos I enjoy watching, also stream on YouTube a lot.

Second Wind is probably the channel I'm most hung up about. I like their normal videos, and don't want to unsubscribe from their channel, but jesus they stream two or three times a day.

(Also, it's annoying that when I view a YouTube channel, I can visit their videos page or their streams page separately. Why can't I have this same separation on my own subscriptions page?)

(Also also, I already use an extension to hide shorts (among other things), but it unfortunately does not have a feature for hiding streams.)

Fancy bullet point summary:

• I want to hide recorded streams from my subscriptions page
  • I don't care as much about hiding active livestreams, because those don't pollute my subscriptions page nearly as much
• I do not want to unsubscribe from any of the channels I follow. That is not an option
• I'm willing to stop using youtube.com in favor of an alternative client (web, desktop, etc) if that client supports hiding recorded streams from actual videos
• I'm willing to install a browser extension that can solve this problem (but I can't find one for Firefox)

Ninja edit:

While writing up this topic, I actually found my own solution. The browser extension I mentioned earlier has an "advanced blocking" feature that takes a JavaScript function as input. The extension's GitHub page has an issue, with a comment, with some code to hide streamed videos on the subscriptions page.

However, that code didn't work when I tried it. Thankfully, I just needed to check for videoRenderer instead of gridVideoRenderer.

Here's the updated code:

(video, objectType) => {
    // Only videos on the Subscription page
    if ( objectType === "videoRenderer" ) {
        if ( video.hasOwnProperty("badges") && video.badges.includes("live") ) {
	    return true;
        }
        if ( video.hasOwnProperty("publishTimeText") && video.publishTimeText.indexOf("Streamed") != -1 ) {
            return true;
        }
    }
    return false;
}

I have no idea what the consequences of checking against videoRenderer instead of gridVideoRenderer might be, and right now I'm too lazy to find out. This works well enough for now.

(The "consequence" might be that streams are hidden from the related/recommended videos in the sidebar of a video page? I actually hide that sidebar, so I wouldn't know. Oh, and they'll probably be hidden from a channel's streams feed.)

It isn't a perfect solution though. Streams that are "scheduled" still show up on the subscriptions page. However, I think channels can set streams and videos as scheduled? So blocking one without the other would be more complicated?

I welcome any feedback or improvements on the code.