To be fair, I think those devs have a good idea on how a content-addressable-filesystem-cum-blockchain should work. The primary use-case, Linux kernel development, has very particular needs such as being distributed, allowing complex merge strategies, and being aggressively transparent. That the rest of the world then adopted this particular (D)VCS was mostly an accident.

Back in the before times when git was first new, I was an avid supporter of svk (a perl hack that bolted on distributed qualities to svn). Very useful to have complete server state locally especially for merging. svk worked, but had a lot of foibles, being the hack that it was. When I finally pulled the trigger and migrated repos over to git, even those early versions, reduced the complexity of my setup dramatically. Haven't looked back since. The porcelain of git has improved dramatically over the years (even if I still use git checkout -b). But it is still very much an expert tool and most users don't engage deeply with it. Which is exactly what the blog post recognizes and laments because the supposed experts aren't.