Don't we ever learn. We've known since VisiCalc in the '80s not to trust spreadsheets for important data without crosschecking the results.
The question is why do we still use substandard tools for processing important data like this.
The question is why do we still use substandard tools for processing important data like this.
Because there is no better alternative (yet)?
A better alternative needs to be really better, to justify the effort of people relearning how to do things in this better tool then.
Any replacement system which, for example, enforced a strong separation between operations, input reference data and output result data would require users to learn the model before attempting to use the software. This is a pretty big ask, especially since lots of small-scale users wouldn't see an immediate benefit. I think of it like the tradeoff between dynamic and static typing when programming- it's the same "upfront mental overhead versus long term maintainability" question IMO.
And Sheets isn't "really better", yet gained a noticeable share