Comment by yjftsjthsd-h

Almost? I'd fully support

1. Programmer skill and talent are not enough to achieve similar security properties with memory-unsafe languages as with memory-safe languages.

2. Therefore, "memory-safe languages are technically superior, period, for applications processing untrusted data where security is an important goal"

but the problem entirely boils down to what comes next:

3a. Therefore everything should use rust.

3b. Therefore everything processing untrusted data where security is an important goal should use rust. (Some folks like to stretch what could possibly process untrusted data to turn this into 3a, but there is a difference.)

3c. Therefore most programs really should be written with a garbage-collector, or if they really need to be low-level or high performance they should use an appropriate stack to avoid gc while remaining safe (whether that's Rust, Ada+SPARK, formally-verified assembly, or whatever).