I believe the same is the case with limited control over technology. Most users do not care to learn, and would opt to actively avoid the opportunity to learn if the associated danger was removed for them.
In my opinion the best option is to remain in the current state by default and have a more obscure 'power user' option that could be enabled within the OS itself.
I mean, I do it for a living and I'm glad I know.
But I don't really know how bridges, or electric guitars, or cars, or genetic engineering, or oil paintings work.
It's awfully gatekeeper-y to insist that computers should be these totally wide-open, unsafe spaces.
I mean it's almost exactly like saying people should know how to rebuild an engine if they want to drive a car.
It's certainly good to know how to rebuild an engine, but surely many people should be able to use cars without knowing that...
As a further point, drivers are (with edge case exceptions) not kept away or locked down from performing any work on their vehicle, yet in most cases they would still prefer to pass the responsibility on to a trusted professional.
Recently, I fixed a number of small (non-drivetrain) things on my car and I wish I knew more.
If people don't get the opportunity to fuck up, you arrest their development. Stupid software users then becomes a self-fulfilling prophesy. Users will become dumber than they ever were before, and therefore more and more reliant on software developers to do/make everything for them. In my cynical moments, I suspect this is all intentional... Imagine if the fast food industry were throwing their weight around to promote the idea that children should be kept out of kitchens.