I really like this – thank you for writing it! A related (but not quite the same, I think) idea is that people should not have to bend to technology; technology should bend to people.

It can be difficult to design for people, though. People tend to over- or underestimate the frequency and severity of rare events, are susceptible to the normalization of deviance, and due to their finite nature, fail to consider wider or longer-term implications of their decisions. Going along with the analogy: forest rangers also have a duty to protect the forest (and in fact, I think this ought to take precedent over accommodating hikers) and they also want to guide hikers away from dangerous terrain or wildlife that underprepared hikers may be tempted to visit.

I think the core idea here is "design around the way users actually behave, not the way they ought to behave".