It always has to be some moral thing with you people. What's "wrong" is that software practitioners who don't know their history are doomed to repeat it. It implies a lack of exposure to different parts of the field, and especially a lack of exposure to the theory. Someone who thinks Rust is an entirely new idea in computing probably has other massive gaps in their knowledge, and it follows the irrational pop culture this industry has cultivated where anything older than 18 months is bad, and anything newer than 18 months has never existed before and is the greatest thing since sliced bread.
Some of us are tired of cleaning up after the inevitable messes these developers leave behind.
For what it's worth, you're right. I saw the same thing happen with Go: everyone seems to think that Go invented static linking and gasp compiling executables, seemingly ignorant of the fact that we actually used to do that all the time, before bloated dynamic runtimes and massive virtual machines even existed. I don't trust software "experts" who don't know their history, because they usually don't know a lot of other important things, either.
Okay? Programmers have to understand lots of things that aren't just the bare basics of the language they're using. When did we decide that all software developers are helpless? When can we get back to expecting experts to know things?
Some of us are tired of cleaning up after the inevitable messes these developers leave behind.