The terms correctness (from a PLT perspective) and safety (from a security perspective) are not equivalent and interchangeable. I see them mixed up too much in this discussion.
PLT has used the term "type safety" for a very long time -- so "safety" does not imply a security perspective. And yes it is indeed very different from correctness. But the article doesn't claim that memory safety should imply correctness -- that would be ridiculous, obviously you can write buggy programs in memory-safe languages. The article claims that Go is not memory-safe.
