I find your perspective a little bizarre. For instance, if we look on a galactic time scale, Lisp and Go were created at pretty much the same instant!
It's not fair to Rust to compare it to Go, as if they are at the same stage of their adoption and development. Several years is makes a big difference in the tech world.
Err, wat.
It seems ridiculously reasonable to compare programming languages on the time-scale of modern computing (~70 years). Dismissing the comparison like that is pretty crazy.
However, don't get me wrong: I totally agree that the years between the stable releases of the projects makes a big difference, especially now, while it is such a large percentage of the total lifetime of them.
Of course, but Rust has been in tech news for a while already. E.g., the Rust 0.1 post garnered 82 comments[1], over 3 years ago. Rust seems to be first mentioned in a submission title 5 years ago.
Of course, their inception was not exactly at the same time. But if we look back in 20 years, it's the same timeframe. Just like e.g. Python and Ruby, despite being 4 years apart. Or C and Pascal.
[1] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=3501980