That is a serious problem, but advocating X11 will not solve anything. Wayland is being improved every day, while X.org is in deep maintenance mode.
And let's not pretend that X.org is perfect. Race conditions at least can be fixed, even if it takes a lot of time and effort. Worst case, someone will rewrite wlroots in Rust. But in X11 any application can kill other applications, install a key logger, pin itself to the foreground, etcetera. This is by design: it's what makes window managers, xkill
and xeyes
work. It's also a huge security flaw that can never be fixed.
Most of the post is an "argument from authority": Trust me, I have a PhD and maintain my own X server, and I assure you that Wayland is a pile of shit!
OP claims that "actually nothing will actually run" because the stable Wayland protocols lack so much important functionality. In reality, many people use Wayland every day, and multiple large distributions use it as the default display server. This doesn't inspire confidence in OP's knowledge.
Admittedly, the first bug they linked is a real issue and it should be fixed, but it's not a Wayland design flaw. It's an (arguably important) feature that hasn't been implemented by all compositors yet. With the second bug OP laments that Wayland compositors are implemented in C, an unsafe language. This is true about X.org too, so I don't really see the point. Arguably Wayland improves on X11 here, because someone could develop a new Wayland compositor in Rust, while in X11 this is a core part of the display server.