> But choosing a new technology just because it's new and popular? Sure, but the given example states that as assumption. IRL how is that determined. The artic

> But choosing a new technology just because it's new and popular? Sure, but the given example states that as assumption. IRL how is that determined. The article states: > Investigating, you find out that there’s no compelling business reason for the component to be written in Rust. Not much of a technical reason either but doesn't detail if that was based on (or in agreement with) the opinion of the senior engineer who implemented the service, or the opinion of the author (whose role isn't that clear). I'd also state that that while "choosing a new technology just because it's new" is bad (although could easily be a proxy for the features that the new thing actually brings - Rust isn't just a new rehash of existing languages, it brings unique features); "choosing a new technology just because it's popular" does have merit.