This comment comes across a lot like the fanboys screeching about how their 1985 or 91 Toyota had a "nice" interior as if the most rattle prone 2009 GM work truck interior isn't better in every way just as a result of sheer cumulative progress. Like if you actually put A beside B and look at them without the rose tinted veneer of nostalgia it's not even a comparison.

Rusty rarely exercised drum brakes have a ton of failure modes that result in severely degraded or nonexistent performance that the average motorist probably wouldn't care about until they really need the brakes and they don't all work well enough.

The heat capacity of drums is pretty easily made noticeable, not "exceeded" to the point of substantially reduced capacity, but noticeable from the driver's seat in just a few good stops in high ambient temps (think like stop and go light to light in somewhere like DC or Miami) or one decent hill. Yeah you can polish the turd with fancy fins and materials and airflow, etc. but discs are just so much better per dollar and per pound.

Most of the problems discs have are NVH and rotor problems that are easily solved for intermittent/lesser use with the simple use of better alloys (Dexter even makes stainless for boat trailers, which are probably the ultimate example of extreme intermittent usage, so it's not like this is groundbreaking). Dominant slider pin designs these days are highly optimized for performance/NVH at the expense of longevity but there's an entire catalog of historical designs that one could easily conclude have better tradeoffs for less demanding usage.

Rusted rarely exercised drum brakes are already known to be far more reliable than rusted rarely exercised disc brakes, that is why many vehicles still or had until recently kept drum brakes in the rear where they get far less usage and get 1/10th the attention as front brakes. Or in trailers brakes that are utilized far less often.

But people already had this entire debate decades ago when disc brakes were first implemented. If you are racing or using a lot of braking power, discs are obviously better, they have better heat dissipation, they are quicker to repair and replace, more predictable for analog/dumb traction and stability control systems, and getting them rusty and dirty isn't a concern because you are racing and/or using the shit out of them. And most of the disadvantages became of little concern to consumers because when the consumer market moved towards automatic transmissions and smaller displacement engines people stopped engine braking constantly and were instead clearing their brakes off at literally every stop so dirty disc brakes stopped being a common concern. But the downsides still exist and is why disc brakes haven't taken over all applications.

Like yeah, drums have less heat capacity and worse cooling, but the entire point of regenerative braking is that you don't use them as much and so heat issues don't matter, only a small fraction of your braking force will use the physical brakes. Ideally in an EV your physical brakes are 100% a safety item, not a common usage item, and so reliability should be the top concern.