[foerbert]

I'd probably agree with that characterization. It's not that people are out there specifically claiming memory safety solves everything, but rather that the 'public consciousness' seems to have utterly forgotten that any other kind of safety exists.

As a result, you get languages like (and mainly) Rust being held up as the paragons of program correctness and safety in general. Any discussions of program safety end up being entirely about memory safety.

It's just an endless hoard of comments/blogs/posts/etc of people conflating memory safety with correctness and not even acknowledging - or possibly even knowing - there are other kinds of safety out there.

So the rhetoric being referenced there is largely implicit. Anybody who actually mentions memory safety in specific terms is already ahead of the curve.