“Need” feels like a strong choice of words here. A strong point of python is its readable by people who aren’t familiar with it. := has no intuitive meaning
But the intuitive meaning of = and the actual Python meaning of = are completely different. Which is the entire point here.
Indeed, there's no intuitive of "the box that is referred to by the name on the left shall now contain the value that is the result of the computation on the right" since serious humans have had no need to express the concept.
Most people who code in Python have no idea what they're doing. It's all magical incantations that they fiddle with until it gives the output they want. That's why python prohibits
if x = some_computation()
since if it permitted it, everyone would be all wtf. But the number of people who can gather that "sequence of symbols taken as a unit" has some arbitrary new meaning almost certainly significantly exceeds the number of people who can gather that "symbol traditionally used for signifying equality" has some arbitrary new meaning.
And, at the very least, if you see some incredible incomprehensible sequence of symbols you can ask what they mean. It is, however, necessary that you have not unknowingly misunderstood what the symbols mean before you can seek clarification, since no-one ever asks for clarification for something they fully but incorrectly understand.
That's it. Symbols, notation, have power. Most programmers don't understand this because they have never been exposed to the idea. It is only natural that people reject it violently when proposed.
