You wouldn't 'make one up' there would be an automatic variation of Semantic Versioning, or something actually useful.

Your 'warm and fuzzy' comes at the cost of confusion (even to yourself), not having any clue what the information really means.

It's not even clear that it's a commit, it could be anything.

This posture is exactly what I'm complaining about: it's objectively bad design engineering, embraced as though somehow it's 'smart'.

Git has a few problems like this.

Git has problems: stipulated. Improvements in design are possible: also stipulated.

But, your reply is annoying in opining about my mental state and preferences. How am I confused by the SHA-1 commits, exactly? And how am I unclear that I’m looking at commits when I issue a “git log”?