I don't understand why the parent post of yours is getting this much downvotes. What's wrong with using a GC'ed language when performance requirements are permissive?
That's not precisely their statement even if it is their intention. I don't think anyone could argue that statement (though some may deny your axiom of lax performance requirements).
I think people are taking issue with the claims that _Rust_ is imposing the cognitive burden. As I said, these burdens already exist, languages just weren't forcing people to deal with them.
Coming from C, you should be thinking about lifetimes and mutability and sharing. If you dont, your program may work but be buggy. Rust forces you to think about that.
Go does the same thing in different ways at different costs. It trades memory/performance so that you don't have to worry about allocations and simply doesnt use standard shared mutability patterns (not exactly, but channels take up most of the same space).