> I'm in the "Pro-Rust" camp (not fanboy level "everything must be rewritten in rust", but "the world would be a better place if more stuff used Rust")

While techno-religiosity is irrational and unprofessional, but that's some weak, eye-rolling both-sidesism.

The world would be a better place™ if more stuff used better and more formal tools and methods to prove that code is correct and bug-free. This is easier in some languages than others, but still, there's a lot of formal verification tools that aren't used enough and methodology patterns and attitudes that are missing from crucial projects and regular use. Effective safety and security assurance of software creation takes effort and understanding that a huge fraction of programmer non-software engineers don't want to undertake or know anything about. This needs to change and is defensible, marketable expertise that needs to be appreciated and cannot be replaced by AI anytime soon. There's no "easy" button, but there are a lot of "lazy" "buttons" that don't function as intended.