Value read. Although I do not sign on every point made.

As for the quest to find a new language I think one programming language won't cut it for all problems, and we have a reasonable amount of new languages at our disposal to replace dinosaurs like e.g. Java (with Kotlin being the obvious choice there). The only programming language of old that struggles to find a appropriate successor is C++ - and since the recent Cybersecurity report to the US presidency discouraging the use of C and C++ this language is in dire need to have one. The main issue is to come up with something better here that can easily use what is already there in the C++ eco system. Carbon is trying. As is cpp2.

As this is the most important issue for any new programming language: coming up with an eco-system of tools and libraries ready to use. Only languages that make use of the eco-system of their predecessor have a chance. That's why the introduction of Swift in the Apple eco-system was so successful, as interop with its predecessor (Objective C) was easy to achieve, that's why Kotlin is so successful doing a similar thing on the Android platform. The worst feature of Rust is its C/C++-interoperability which is essential in the system programming domain Rust is targeting.

I think you should add that requirement to the "new" language you are dreaming of: utilising as much of the software of value that is already there (at least within its application domain), as that value is big, really big, decades of work of millions of people.