My small understanding is that the "(or any other)" part is not correct in your statement, and that you are locked into thinking of version control as being git-like.
I think the implication is that version control is not git like, and that it's not that we both changed the text on line 17, rather we both made additions to the underlying structure.
Indeed, it's impossible for us to both edit the same file, because files are never modified. They are immutable, like a blockchain transaction.
I haven't quite understood how it works in practice, though, but definitely don't think "git".
But git works the same way. All files are immutable. All directory
trees are immutable. Basically all version control works that way at some level.
Storing data this way doesn't solve the problem of merging the two changes into a new single change. When you can't do that automatically, it's called a conflict.
The only mutable data in git is the list of hashes you've given names to. You can use git without branch names if you want, living in a world of pure immutable hashes. It doesn't do anything to help you get rid of merge conflicts.
I think the implication is that version control is not git like, and that it's not that we both changed the text on line 17, rather we both made additions to the underlying structure.
Indeed, it's impossible for us to both edit the same file, because files are never modified. They are immutable, like a blockchain transaction.
I haven't quite understood how it works in practice, though, but definitely don't think "git".