I agree with you. My typical workflow is: update master branch in Visual Studio, create a new branch off of the master, work on it, when ready use GitGUI to commit and push, then do a merge request in GitLab (we use GitLab). When approved, I push the branch to master. From time to time I need to update my branch, either because I make some code changes, or because my branch a few commits behind the master.

Would I like to know more about the underlying ideas of Git. Yes. But the time it would take me to do that is time I can spend on other things, like the stuff I am actually paid to do. If I become a git guru, I might get a pat on the back, but more likely no one would care. If I deliver more stuff, people who use my stuff actually appreciate it.

The reason it's sad to me is because there is so much more to explore, to be stimulated by, to be able to apply in a way that makes you think out of the box.

Maybe a lot of people don't care about that, and I guess everybody has their threshold, where as long as they know the minimum required to do their job they can stay in that comfort zone typing the same commands over and over.

It's also sad because the "lol I only know four git commands" people are the most likely to break something, or to make bad long-term decisions about how to manage a source tree (yes, it's possible to do it wrong). Amazing that we have programmers advocating for deliberately staying ignorant of the tools they're expected to know.