Rails needs to die. It is super nice to code in (for a certain class of problems, ie. CRUD apps) and the language is awesome but it is too big and insecure to use.
Anything you implement to replace the functionality missed by not using Rails will be, statistically, just as insecure. Arguably, even more-so because you will no doubt lack the peer review a large project like Rails benefits from.
I don't think so. Rails has to cover all cases, you just have to code the few cases that you actually use.
And even if you get it wrong, you get it wrong in a different way. That might mean that you are technically more at risk, but so long as the attack is focused on getting as many targets as possible, rather than you explicitly, then that is arguably a great strategy: the cost of adapting an already existing attack to target a novel target is going to be astronomically high, versus using an already existing vulnability. If you are refining neuclear material for Iran, you are going to need all the protection you can get; if you are just another start-up you just need not to be vulneable to the latest drive-by exploit.
Can we please try to avoid making generalisations like this? Yes, the ruby community has some very vocal contributors with very questionable social skills. Please don't assume that all ruby developers are egotistical hipster hackers. The creator or Ruby, Matsumoto Yukihiro is one of the most softly spoken and humble individuals I have encountered in technology. We can all learn by his example.
Some ruby devs do, yes. Sadly, this feudalistic approach is prevalent in our industry which hurts all of us. It is probably the reason we have to keep re-learning the same concepts over-and-over again.
There is no karma here, there is just a race to the bottom for all of us. I thought the point of OS was for us all to group together and find and address these issues?