[greenhearth]

I don't think anyone ever said it was completely safe. This is a pre-conception on the part of the critics. Every Rust resource I looked at stated that the toolset exists to support inherent safety, but there is still a contract with the programmer that requires them to know what they are doing.

[rust_is_dead]

Rust is "safe" and other languages are "unsafe". Haskell is "pure" while other language are "impure". Some macro systems are "hygienic" while others are "dirty". It is not an accident that the humpty dumpties (language designers) chose to use these particular terms for their semantic distinctions. It's useful for propaganda. The mind encounters a colloquial term and equivocates. This happens in both the critics and the evangelizers. Inferences drawn are then often unjustified.

[greenhearth]

Agreed, it does appear to be heavily sponsored and marketed. And you are correct that these pre-conceptions affect advocates as well! But I think the push for wide-scale acceptance is not unreasonable. If it is completely necessary I suppose only will be known sometime in the future.