As I say probably too often, the modern usage of "full stack" basically equates to "iceberg tip".
For other areas, we usually talk about "Systems programming" or "Application programming". I suppose the full stack there would be to do both?
Even if they don’t have the authorization to fix it. They should at least be able to tell the ops folks what they need.
Even the omission of the word "web" as you have pointed out, seems to have the smell of arrogance, as if web programming is all there is worth working on these days. But the web programming world, IMHO, is full of this kind of CV inflating jargon, lingo and buzzwords, whether it's "full stack", "Agile", "devops" etc.
Obviously, there is an element of old man "get off my lawn" that I am invoking. I am almost certainly projecting here, but it still grinds me the wrong way.
I'd never heard it prior to five or ten years ago.
It's always been a pretty ambiguous term IMO. I think it may have been coined to make some genuine distinction but just how broad was it intended to mean? The question is moot because it was quickly spread to mean very different things. You need a lot of context to make a good guess what it refers to.
https://hackernoon.com/6-essential-tips-on-how-to-become-a-f...
Important bits almost always left out: provisioning of hypervisors, network switching/trunking/routing, security, embedded on the backend, etc.
(Should I link my professional life to my HN account in my bio? Is that the "done thing"?)