One of the points in the article is that most problems are non-linear in nature, rather than linear. But a language like Rust, has designed its entire type syst

One of the points in the article is that most problems are non-linear in nature, rather than linear. But a language like Rust, has designed its entire type system around this concept of ownership semantics which can only deal with linear logical problems. The biggest appeal of Rust to many is that it is "safe" and it is "safe" because of its ownership semantics and lifetime semantics. There are many other reasons to use Rust, of course, but this is the main reason it was made. I would argue that its "safety" is fundamentally the biggest reason to use it. I don't disagree with you that C is not a low level language, but a very high level language. But you have made a false dichotomy regarding "mutable things" and then talking about other things about a computer. I am not saying "a computer is only X", but "a computer is X, but also Y, Z, W, ..." The "fatal flaw" bit is purposeful click bait. "A critique of ownership semantics" is not necessarily a good.