You are pushing fud about not having typing systems at all... they are valuable to automated systems for introspection to some degree.
However you are talking about typing as if all typing is static - static typing has little value beyond warm and fuzzies on the developers part, dynamic typed systems are able to perform just as well. At which point, the dynamic part can allow you to mostly drop the types.
statically typed systems, you will note, tend to come with ecosystems dedicated to using the static bits as little as possible. And they provide no guarantee of correctness.
Yes, new devs might be able to latch onto some specific typing a bit better, but I don't care if you have all the automated refactors and a hundred new employees, if your codebase sucks and is incorrect, your static analysis is worth didly squat.
However you are talking about typing as if all typing is static - static typing has little value beyond warm and fuzzies on the developers part, dynamic typed systems are able to perform just as well. At which point, the dynamic part can allow you to mostly drop the types.
statically typed systems, you will note, tend to come with ecosystems dedicated to using the static bits as little as possible. And they provide no guarantee of correctness.
Yes, new devs might be able to latch onto some specific typing a bit better, but I don't care if you have all the automated refactors and a hundred new employees, if your codebase sucks and is incorrect, your static analysis is worth didly squat.