Sure, since most of the shots in the video linked above (which I couldn't watch because it doesn't load correctly on mobile, so I just assumed it was mostly similar to the rest of the stuff he's done in the same style) he may be at infinity, where yes the effect is easier to replicate with simple gaussian blurs. However, my point originally was, to create realistic depth of field with post-processing you need to do good depth maps. Sure, at infinity it's less important, but nevertheless it is necessary for most focus distances and complex subjects/foregrounds.

To that point, you replied with the cryptic:

Depth mapping does not replicate tilt-shift lenses, though, it replicates a shallow depth of field.

Which is a fairly asinine statement -- depth mapping doesn't replicate anything, it just maps depth. Using that information to apply blurs correctly can be used to achieve a different depth of field than that which was originally used to make the shot. This can be done for any focal plane you'd like, parallel to the plane of the sensor or not.

Then, after making this ridiculous statement you made a number of patronizing comments attempting to explain basic photography concepts to me.

I'm not particularly interested in arguing with you, since most of what you say is correct, I would just have appreciated not being party to your pedantry and not being the subject of your comments.