I see your point, but I do think the amount of time spent writing type specifications is (usually) negligible, in return for an extremely large benefit whenever

I see your point, but I do think the amount of time spent writing type specifications is (usually) negligible, in return for an extremely large benefit whenever the code needs to be read by you or someone else later. I would certainly argue that anyone who writes a library, whose public API will be consumed by hundreds or thousands of people, should always include type annotations. After working in a TypeScript codebase for so long, it's jarring to return to Python or even vanilla JavaScript where I no longer have breadcrumbs to help me keep track of how the code is organized. Python's type annotations leave something to be desired, in terms of how easy they are to include in code and how well the tooling supports them. I'd almost rather see something like "Typethon" with better syntax+soundness that compiles-to-Python. Types are an optional tool, sure, but they're one of the most valuable tools we have to catch (not eliminate entirely) bugs and hasten development (without introducing errors).