Sometimes I think I'm a 'full stack' developer, and then I read something like this. Sure I can dabble in simple assembly, but there's always a bigger fish.
I advocated for the term to only be used by folks that can build their own computer, language, OS, and apps. Look up Chuck Moore and Niklaus Wirth for examples focusing on simplicity. For full-stack architect w/ team building it, look up Bob Barton of Burrough B5000. I cant remember if early folks writing Lisp interpreters built the CPU's, too. I know Burger did for a Scheme CPU, though.
The focus was on expressive power more than simplicity, though.
If you wish to make an apple pie from scratch, you must first invent the universe.We all gotta pick our specialties. For me, low level high-performance stuff is more of hobby project level. I got a few cool things I've learned by myself but it isn't really what I do for a living.
Web isn't some magical beast- its just rote programming.
Actual business logic is where the categorization starts.
If you want to be humbled, go to a conference on high energy physics.
That isn't what the poster stated.
How about a Java to MIPS compiler? In C++ and then again in Java just to be self-hosting.
Or an all software OpenGL-compatible pipeline with painter-algorithm Z-buffering and trapezoid engine? Quaternions and all that state... fun-fun.
Another mandatory project in college was a non-pre-fork()ed select() caching HTTP/1.0 proxy in POSIX C89. IPC was a PITA back then.
There are still bigger fish, but one can be that much less of dilettante by digging deeper and mastering the why, not the what or the current fashion.