In some grand sense i think you're right, but your comment fails to appreciate the economics of the issue. I put computer algorithms to work on problems I want to solve; it advances my goals. On the other hand, Git puts me to work on problems that are a necessity of some external requirement or some other purpose in the category of "distraction": I get paid for the computer algorithms part, not the understanding Git part.
You are right it's not hard, it's complex. My problem is that my actual problems can be both hard and complex... and putting a complex distraction in the way detracts from my goals: not enhances it.
I think many in technology fail to appreciate this distinction. I often hear open source advocates respond to complaints about software quality jumping up to suggest opening issues or contributing fixes... which is fine in its own right: but if those issues/fixes aren't reasonably in line with my own goals in trying to use some class of tool... and some other solutions such as a closed source solution meet the goals more readily... I'm probably not going to spend my time advancing someone else's goals at the expense of my own.
You are right it's not hard, it's complex. My problem is that my actual problems can be both hard and complex... and putting a complex distraction in the way detracts from my goals: not enhances it.
I think many in technology fail to appreciate this distinction. I often hear open source advocates respond to complaints about software quality jumping up to suggest opening issues or contributing fixes... which is fine in its own right: but if those issues/fixes aren't reasonably in line with my own goals in trying to use some class of tool... and some other solutions such as a closed source solution meet the goals more readily... I'm probably not going to spend my time advancing someone else's goals at the expense of my own.