The Trolley Rebase Dilemma

Behold the library scholar who created a single "Hello World" repository and suddenly transforms into an open source evangelist. Nothing screams "expert contributor" quite like pushing six lines of code that literally every programming tutorial starts with. It's the equivalent of making one grilled cheese sandwich and calling yourself a Michelin-star chef. The audacity is almost admirable - standing there with SpongeBob, preaching the gospel of collaboration while their entire coding portfolio consists of console.log("Hello World!") . The open source community trembles in anticipation of such revolutionary contributions.

The pinnacle of version control laziness: just add * to your .gitignore and call it a day. Why carefully select which files to ignore when you can ignore everything and manually add each file you want? It's like burning down your house to avoid cleaning it, then rebuilding one room at a time. Genius time-saving strategy until you need to git add -f 500 files. Works every time, 0% of the time.

Who needs romance when you've got abandoned projects, right? Nothing quite like the desperate midnight hunt through your GitHub graveyard looking for that one function you wrote 6 months ago. "I know I solved this exact problem before!" *frantically scrolls through 47 half-finished repos* The ultimate programmer relationship status: committed to nothing except finding that one piece of code you were "totally going to document later."

The Noah's Ark of code sources! At the top, we've got the majestic elephant (StackOverflow) carrying us through floods of bugs, the wise but dusty Documentation nobody reads, the giraffe (YouTube tutorials) stretching the truth but somehow working, GitHub code that's supposedly "production-ready," and the professor's theoretical perfection that falls apart in real life. Then there's your friend's code (which you secretly judge while copying), and your actual code (that embarrassing mess you hide from the world). But when the client shows up? Suddenly you're presenting that bizarre hybrid monstrosity—a chimera of StackOverflow answers, YouTube hacks, and panic-induced workarounds that somehow functions. And the client stares at your Frankenstein creation thinking "what the hell is this?" The true engineering skill isn't writing perfect code—it's making your abomination look intentional during the demo.

The eternal cycle of developer enthusiasm. Top frame: joyfully playing with the shiny new project while completely ignoring last week's project drowning right next to you. Bottom frame: your GitHub graveyard—a haunting underwater boneyard of abandoned repositories that will never see a commit again. The real horror isn't the code quality; it's the commitment issues.

The coding journey depicted as a mountain climb is painfully accurate! First, you're just "learning to code" - a gentle uphill battle where everything seems possible. Then comes "tutorial hell" where you're stuck following guides without understanding why things work. Eventually, you reach "coding semi-comfortably" where the slope levels out and you feel like you've finally got this... until "VERSION CONTROL" appears as a vertical cliff that sends you plummeting into the abyss of merge conflicts and commit nightmares. The sudden transition from solo coding bliss to the harsh reality of collaboration is like discovering your comfortable pillow fort is actually built on quicksand.