But if the Rust versions are as safe as claimed, then you're making the critique of C++ stronger, by pointing out that the pitfalls are easier to fall into than

But if the Rust versions are as safe as claimed, then you're making the critique of C++ stronger, by pointing out that the pitfalls are easier to fall into than the blog post presents -- for the second, you don't even need threads! (And aliasing is one of the things that Rust's borrow machinery at least tries to address, even in a single-threaded context.) So, is he wrong about the Rust part?