I’ve seen you post a variant of this comment on multiple Rust-adjacent threads, and I still don’t understand it: Rust was by no means the first “safe” language, it wasn’t the one pushed by Big Tech (that’s Go, another good language!), and there’s no particular evidence that preventing jailbreaks is the actual, secret intention here. That last part borders on conspiracy, given that engineers are overwhelmingly anti-DRM and pro-modification.
given that engineers are overwhelmingly anti-DRM and pro-modification.
If they were, things wouldn't be the way they are today. Perhaps you're saying that they are, but can only express that position in the form of subtle exploits (which seem to be decreasing over time)? No, I think the majority of engineers are overwhelmingly complacent and obedient, and won't oppose.
As for why Rust, that's because the amount of prosletysing of that language seems to be far more than all the others.
