> If anything it's more readable, since your code isn't littered with redundant type info.

I fail to see the redundant type info.

Example 1:

int maxWeight = blocks.stream() .filter(b -> b.getColor() == BLUE) .mapToInt(Block::getWeight) .max();

"int" is not redundant type info here.

Example 2:

List<String> list = new ArrayList<>(); // (1)

var list = new ArrayList<String>(); // (2)

Many would say List<String> in (1) is redundant but I would argue otherwise. The intention of List<String> in (1) is to reference to the underline ArrayList through List interface. (1) is trying to encourage programming to an interface while (2) just completely destroys the practice by inferring the type for list variable to be ArrayList<String>. That means subsequent method invocations after (2) can be methods from ArrayList not List.