Invalid warning / correction about UnusedMethodArgument when using numbered parameters in 1.44

[PatrickLerner]

Given a code such as:

class Foo
  def bar(name)
    foos.find { _1.name == name }
  end
end

In 1.44 I am seeing an error:

patrick@znovu ~/P/I/P/app (dependabot-bundler-ruboc…*) $ bin/rubocop foo.rb
Inspecting 1 file
W

Offenses:

foo.rb:4:11: W: [Correctable] Lint/UnusedMethodArgument: Unused method argument - name. If it's necessary, use _ or _name as an argument name to indicate that it won't be used. If it's unnecessary, remove it. You can also write as bar(*) if you want the method to accept any arguments but don't care about them.
  def bar(name)
          ^^^^

1 file inspected, 1 offense detected, 1 offense autocorrectable

while in 1.43 the code was accepted as valid (which it is)

patrick@znovu ~/P/I/P/app (master*) $ bin/rubocop foo.rb
Inspecting 1 file
.

1 file inspected, no offenses detected

---

Expected behavior

The code is perfectly valid, and the suggested correction is dangerous and will render it non-functioning. I expect no error to be given. The behavior is related to numbered parameters, if the numbered parameter is removed, it works as expected.

Actual behavior

See above.

RuboCop version

$ rubocop -V
1.44.0 (using Parser 3.2.0.0, rubocop-ast 1.24.1, running on ruby 2.7.2) [arm64-darwin21]
  - rubocop-graphql 0.19.0
  - rubocop-rails 2.17.4
  - rubocop-rake 0.6.0
  - rubocop-rspec 2.18.1

[PatrickLerner]

I am also seeing a likely related issue given a rspec file like this:

# frozen_string_literal: true

shared_examples 'FooBar' do
  foo_values = %w(foo bar)

  it 'contains nested attributes' do
    expect(data[:foos].all? { _1.keys.sort == foo_values }).to be true
  end
end

where rubocop reports:

patrick@znovu ~/P/I/P/app (dependabot-bundler-ruboc…*) $ bin/rubocop foo_spec.rb
Inspecting 1 file
W

Offenses:

foo_spec.rb:4:3: W: Lint/UselessAssignment: Useless assignment to variable - foo_values.
  foo_values = %w(foo bar)
  ^^^^^^^^^^

1 file inspected, 1 offense detected

which likewise is incorrect