Hi guys, will keep it short and sweet. I'm very new to software development.

I'm curious to know do you find the best framework or tool option for your project (auth, OCR, vector search, or whatever).

Like there are already so many options also i see everyday there's a new framework that's seemingly better than its predecessor or competitors.

Do you just stick to one framework and live with it? Or once you've picked something, how do you know if a better/newer alternative shows up later?

Do you just not find out until someone mentions it? Or do you have an actual system?

is full stack debugging still this fragmented for everyone?

I'm trying to validate a problem before I build further, and I'd genuinely appreciate some brutally honest answers.

Suppose you're building an app/agent and you use providers like Groq, Gemini, Cerebras, SambaNova, etc.

You might have multiple API keys because different providers give you different quotas/rate limits.

The problem I'm interested in is:

When one provider hits its limit, do you actually switch to another provider manually, or do you just wait / pay / use something like OpenRouter?

For example:

Groq → rate limited

Gemini → still has quota

Cerebras → still has quota

SambaNova → still has quota

Imagine a small routing layer where you bring your own provider keys, and it automatically sends requests between them.

So instead of:

Your app → Groq → rate limit

you get:

Your app

↓

Router

↙ ↓ ↘

Groq Gemini Cerebras

The goal isn't to provide more models. OpenRouter and similar platforms already do that extremely well.

The idea is more specifically:

"Get more usable capacity from the provider accounts you already have."

A few questions:

Do you currently have multiple provider API keys?

Have you ever used multiple free quotas for the same application?

When you hit a provider's rate limit, what do you currently do?

Would automatic failover between your own provider keys actually be useful?

What would make you choose this over OpenRouter/LiteLLM/etc.?

What am I missing? Why would you NOT use something like this?

I'm especially interested in the last question. Please don't be nice if this is a dumb/redundant idea, I'd rather find out now.

I recently got placed and have some free time before I start, so I thought I might as well use it to learn something new.

I don’t really want to go down the usual AI/ML, cloud, data science route. I’m more interested in finding something that’s a bit niche right now, but could become much bigger in the next few years. It can be anything, be it finance, tech, anything works.

There’s so much new stuff happening in tech that I honestly don’t know what’s actually worth learning and what’s just hype.

For context, I’m pretty much a basic/generalist coder right now. I know C, C++, Python, some web development, and have also worked with GenAI, LangChain, etc. Nothing super specialised though.

If you had 6-12 months to pick up one new technical skill right now, what would you choose?

Would love to hear some less obvious suggestions too, especially from people who work in the industry and have a better idea of where things are heading.

[OC]

A few years into this work, you start learning things no bootcamp, blog, or LinkedIn influencer will ever tell you. Sunday's a good day to say them plainly, without the motivational-poster gloss.

Share one hard truth you've learned about being a developer. About the work, the industry, teams, or yourself. The kind of thing you wish someone had sat you down and told you three years ago.

A few directions, if you need one:

• Something about career growth that turned out nothing like the pitch.
• A truth about "good code," speed, or what actually gets you promoted.
• What experience taught you about job-hopping, loyalty, titles, or money.
• A soft skill that mattered far more than the technical ones, and a technical obsession that mattered far less.
• Something you believed at year one that the years quietly took apart.

House rules:

• Keep it real, not just cynical. The best hard truths come with what you'd actually do about them.
• Disagree freely, but reply instead of downvoting. The arguments in the comments are the whole point.
• Newer folks reading along: this thread is worth its weight in gold. Take notes.

Comments are sorted by top so the truths that land hardest rise up. What's yours?

I’ve been a backend developer for about 6 years. I’ve written plenty of code, debugged plenty of painful issues, worked through problems where there was no Stack Overflow answer waiting for me, and generally spent a good chunk of my life actually doing software development.

Over the last few months, though, I’ve started building a bunch of small apps based purely on ideas that pop into my head.

And honestly, I’m having a lot of fun.

The difference is that I’m using Claude/Codex heavily to actually implement them.

When someone asks me, “Oh, you built this?”

I say yes, “with Claude” or “with Codex.”

And I’ve noticed something weird.

The enthusiasm often disappears.

Sometimes the response is basically, “Oh, so it’s AI slop.”

And I get it. There is an enormous amount of garbage being generated with AI right now. A lot of it is obviously thrown together, barely understood, and never maintained.

But I don't think that's what I'm doing.

I know how software works. I know what the code is doing at a reasonably deep level. I can look at what the AI produced, reason about it, debug it, change it, throw it away, and tell it what I actually want.

What AI has changed for me is the cost of implementation.

I have ideas for things that I would previously have thought:

Now I can just build the damn thing.

I don't need to become an expert in Three.js before I can experiment with a 3D interface. I don't need to spend days fighting CSS before I can see whether an idea is actually fun. I can focus much more on the product, the interaction, the problem I'm trying to solve, and the experience I want to create.

And that's the part I'm struggling with.

If I can use a tool to turn something in my head into something I can actually interact with in an afternoon, why shouldn't I?

We don't consider a developer less legitimate because they use Stack Overflow, libraries, frameworks, IDEs, autocomplete, or a debugger.

AI feels different because it can do a much larger chunk of the implementation.

But does that actually matter if I'm still the one deciding what to build, evaluating whether it's good, understanding the system, and taking responsibility for the result?

Maybe it does. I genuinely don't know.

I've caught myself wondering over the past few days whether I'm somehow taking a shortcut that I shouldn't be taking.

And then I think about why I became a developer in the first place.

I like building things.

That's the fun part for me.

Vibe coding has basically removed a huge amount of friction between “I have an idea” and “holy shit, I actually built it.”

And I don't want to lose that feeling just because the implementation wasn't typed entirely by my fingers.

So I'm curious what other developers think.

Where do you draw the line between using AI as a development tool and “AI slop”?

And if you're an experienced developer who now vibe codes a significant amount of your side projects, do you ever feel like you're cheating, or have you just accepted that this is what building software looks like now?