Edit: Nobody else ever gave it instructions that went counter to mine, either. Security vulnerabilities are 100% non-exploitable without power. I should probably start an anti-APT business with that knowledge.
There's a reason the old go to for secure deletion was throwing your hard drive into a wood chipper... (though that's bad for the environment, please don't do that)
People were worried that it would be easy to grab the filled out forms and get a restaurant's guests' phone numbers and addresses (and it probably was). Predictably, one of the rushed web forms had non-existant security, making it easy to get all restaurants guests' phone numbers and addresses.
Rust is an accomplishment, but it’s also a very complicated language. It has a harsh learning curve and simply put, not all software written will benefit as much from the guarantees Rust provides. For a lot of software that will benefit the most, people are already experimenting with it.
seL4’s approach also seems interesting. It is doing C with proofs, which in theory should be able to offer stronger guarantees than even Rust if done correctly.
The language could be C, C++, Rust, Zig. But the design is more important than the language.
Of course, no one with enough resources to do this cares enough to do it.
The down votes come from those that feel personally attacked by your comment. :-)