"not interested in exploring" does not cover _all_ those points; it ignores the possibility that some _have_ explored and assessed those potential benefits—perhaps by looking at the specs and what others have achieved with the new gear rather than acquiring it themselves—and have decided that the potential benefits are negligible or non-existent for them. As surely as in the film era many of us explored the potential benefits of upsizing from 35mm to 645 or beyond—and decided that the potential benefits were not significant for our purposes.
Your wording seems to confuse carefully considered choices with lack of interest, but perhaps you are just not expressing yourself clearly. For example, would you describe the decision of many quite dedicated photographers to not acquire gear in a larger format than their current one, even as it becomes a bit more affordable, as always being due to their being "not interested in exploring the potential benefits"?
For example, I have explored the potential benefits of a 36x24mm or 44x33mm or 54x40mm format kit and decided that it would be a net "dis-benefit" for my photographic objectives.
On the other hand, the better AF and IBIS of newer models does tempt me!
If you don't acquire the gear and use it, you are not really exploring the 'potential' benefits. Did you miss the word 'potential' in my statement?
It's understood that what interests one person often does not necessarily interest another person. We are all different, with different motives and purposes. That's fundamental.
There might be sound, practical reasons why the 'perceived' benefits of one particular camera system are overshadowed by 'perceived' disadvantages, and the significance of those 'perceived' disadvantages will vary according the the individual's circumstances and goals, and will therefore affect his/her interest in exploring the potential benefits of that camera system.
The benefits of Medium Format in the film era is a good example that applied to me. The benefits were always apparent, such as more detail and less noise, but the disadvantages of significantly greater price and weight, overshadowed those benefits, until the beginning of the digital era when professionals started dumping their MF film equipment in favour of the new, but ridiculously expensive, digital cameras.
The price of a second-hand MF camera was suddenly very affordable and much cheaper than the first Nikon and Canon APS-C digital cameras, so, for a few years I enjoyed those benefits of better detail, and lower noise. However, the cumbersome weight of the MF system was still a disadvantage, as well as the expense of the film and the expense of processing the film.
When digital APS-C cameras became affordable, I bought one, and there was no turning back because the advantages of unlimited, free film, outweighed the disadvantages of less detail and more noise.