Only if you consider a computer, owned by a user, following that user's explicit command to run a piece of software (without further hindrance) "a problem".
It would be nice if the rest of the macOS respected the wishes of the hardware's owner equally.
Not really. In an attempt to use some DWIM to avoid surprising the user (“Text”Edit supports styled text not just in RTF but HTML) they introduced a bunch of new surprises (opening a seemingly inert text file actually allows code injection). It’s hard to say that this is clearly respecting the “wishes” of the hardware owner (I suppose the hardware owner might have wanted this, as per the article’s example, but surely that is the minority).
They don’t stop the hardware owner from opening the file in an actual text editor such as Emacs or vi.
And you can still download and run anything you like from the net, though by default they add roadblocks anyone can simply move aside. That’s probably the right thing: in my extended household of 9, really there are only two people downloading arbitrary binaries from the net and running them. And neither of us disables gatekeeper.
It would be nice if the rest of the macOS respected the wishes of the hardware's owner equally.