I feel (especially in today's world) that people are too willing to accept risks that put themselves and others in danger without being informed of the implications or that they maintain a "yea, it will never happen to me" attitude.
That willingness to take risks is especially prevalent in younger demographics. With respect to fortnight when Epic was doing a "disable this check and load from another site" there were numerous copies of the software with malware installed because people were ignoring the risk and looking at what they have. https://www.theguardian.com/games/2018/aug/10/fortnite-on-an...
If you are a power user, and want those features, jailbreaking the phone and doing whatever you want to it is an option. Or maybe, not using an iDevice and going with something that is more open.
There are a lot more people out there that want the training wheels on their technology experience than there are power users.
Personally, after having a linux system that I built myself and compiled kernel patches for back in the day - I'm glad I have the experience and I'm quite happy to let Apple do that now and not have to spend time on that level of verification of software and administration of my own devices.
On the phone itself - I've got lots of personal information, credit cards tied into NFC, email, and IoT controls. And while I'm not going to take risky actions with my phone, I am confident that others will take those risks. As part of Apple's brand identity is privacy and security - allowing people to take those risks works against that brand identity.
One of the frequent comments on HN in the past is "HN may not be the targeted demographic."
I saw a similar comment here before that made sense to me: "The more Apple distanced itself from power users, the more money they made".
Considering that even developers are not too understanding, it's no wonder people assume non-tech people will react the same way.
I really don't see a good solution for that. Even if Apple open sourced Carbon, I doubt Carbon users would be able pick up the slack, since they had 12 years to update but couldn't (or 20 if you consider Carbon was always marketed as a stopgap/compatibility solution).
At a minimum it seems like the system is designed around the lowest common denominator of user at the expense of more power users.