This is the source of many people's frustration, and the source of forced synonyms. A dumb tool that adapts to humans as they use it and tries to be "smart" prohibits us from getting more skilled in the usage of the tool. It becomes unpredictable, and it introduces significant friction each time it does something dumb.
Even if the tool is correct 90% of the time, it is wrong 100% of the time on an emotional/ux level. The successes are invisible in aggregate, but each mistake sticks out like a sore thumb. I guess why this is: modern understanding of our brains (as I, a lay man, understand it) is that they attempt to continuously predict what's going to happen next in their environment. When all predictions are correct it feels good, and there's no tension. A tool that adapts and changes makes our brains predictions turn out wrong, and our brains punish us with tension and attention each time the tool does not do what we want, since it failed to predict the desired behavior.
Previous versions of google felt so nice precisely because our brains, or at least those of hackers, could adapt to its various tricks and shortcuts.