I don’t see any logical sense in this. I think what you’re implying by “dumbed down” technology is technology that is made easy to use. It doesn’t matter how sm

I don’t see any logical sense in this. I think what you’re implying by “dumbed down” technology is technology that is made easy to use. It doesn’t matter how smart you are, more complex than needed interfaces is always dumb design. If a majority of the users use a tool for a couple use cases, the tool should be designed to make doing those tasks as simple as possible. More obscure tasks will be found by the people who need them when necessary, even if their is a steeper learning curve for doing so. I’d never want my hammer to be harder to use than necessary nor would I want a textbook to teach inefficiently because someone thinks the complexity of presentation will make me learn better (while those 2 things may have a spurious correlation, it is possible to get a better outcome while not making the material more complex). My main point is that the people who have trouble with the complexities of a tool will have a more likely chance of abandoning the tool or switching to a different tool than learning. The people who can navigate the interface probably aren’t getting dumber for using the simpler interface either.