It's the official story, no matter how you put it. I'm not saying it's a good thing (in fact, I find it horrible), but it is what it is and I have no idea on how to turn that tide.

There's a lot to be said about freedom of computing, but the fact remains that given the option to screw things up, then some people will do that. At the same time, we have a culture that incentivize catering to the non-technical users in a way that prevents them from screwing things up.

Long story short: If we want to turn this trend, then we need to:

1) Start telling non-technical users that any damage caused through their freedom of action is their own responsibility.

2) Produce competitive products that not only provide the desired amount of freedom, but which also compete on price, desirability, usability and the impression that the products are secure enough to use.

In many cases, 1 will be seen as a way of avoiding responsibility, and it'll take a tremendous amount of effort to convince users (and consumer protection agencies) that they should be less protected just in case someone else decides to tinker with their product. That alone makes 2 more or less impossible.

Ditto with my in-laws and Linux Mint. Thing is, they don't really care about tinkering (just like most people) and so they don't care. Allowing them to tinker would benefit them very little, while it would definitely increase the risk of them screwing things up.