It's not, imo.

It's an example of extremely differing philosophies - of which Rust is a great example of the opposite spectrum of Go.

I imagine there may be a couple other examples, maybe something like Haskell (I wouldn't know), but I'm guessing the author just knew Rust better for this comparison.

It's easier to illustrate problems that shouldn't be problems (in your eyes) if you have solutions for them - especially solutions that you believe work well. Rust's take on these nitpicks is something that the author clearly thinks Go is lacking on.

In my view, this post is a critique on Go and the "simplicity" mantra it has; and only that.