now please translate it into non-marketing words, please.
He says Rust is on the top safe (vertical), but not at the bottom, because the bottom isn't fully proven.
He also says Zig is horizontally safe -> there is unsafe code on any layer, but also safe code.
Also, it doesn't seem like there is something like "unsafe" for Zig. How can you say anything is safe then?
So Zig has one feature that makes it harder (impossible?) to write broken code than with Rust in UNSAFE code.
How does this bring anything to the table besides eloquently dismiss Rusts safety guarantees? E.g. allowing to state libraries to only have safe code in them>
Afaik Rust let's you fully use the HW as well (and as much as possible within safe code).