The AI revolution is ushering in a new wave of creators—domain experts, entrepreneurs, and problem-solvers—who build apps by describing their vision while AI generates the code. They're not aiming to become traditional developers; they're leveraging tools like Supabase or Bolt's Cloud to turn ideas into reality without touching a terminal. But beneath this accessibility lies a subtle, dangerous shift in language that could define the future of software creation. Terms like "backend," "your cloud," and "production ready" are being redefined by platforms, masking critical truths about ownership and control.

At first glance, it seems like progress: a marketing win where complexity is abstracted away. When a builder hears "your cloud," they reasonably assume they own the infrastructure. When an AI tool declares an app "production ready," it conjures images of scalability and reliability. Yet, as Ivan Cernja highlights in his recent essay, this vocabulary is often misleading. In reality, "backend" might mean a locked-down integration with a service like Supabase, "your cloud" refers to renting someone else's infrastructure (e.g., Lovable's Cloud), and "production ready" simply indicates a deployment on a platform with opaque rules. This isn't just simplification—it's misdirection that erodes autonomy.

"Vocabulary shapes how these builders think about what they're building," Cernja writes. "When they need something their platform doesn't offer, they won't think 'I need to add this to my backend.' They'll think 'I guess my app can't do that.'"

The consequences surface when builders attempt to scale, customize, or migrate. They discover they're not owners but customers, bound by terms they never fully grasped. Imagine a small business owner whose app gains traction, only to hit a wall because they can't modify their "backend" or move data without costly rewrites. This isn't hypothetical; it's the inevitable fallout of teaching vocabulary that conflates integration with infrastructure and renting with owning. Abstraction is essential—LLMs excel at translating intents like "monthly subscriptions" into Stripe integrations—but when it obscures ownership, it stifles innovation and fosters dependency.

Thankfully, there's an alternative path: tools that generate real, ownable backends—microservices, databases, APIs—and deploy them directly to personal AWS or GCP accounts. As Cernja notes, this approach prioritizes honesty from day one, ensuring builders retain control. Yes, it's harder to market than a one-click setup, but it aligns with the fundamental principles of technology: empowerment through understanding. With millions set to build their first apps in the coming years—far surpassing historical numbers—the stakes couldn't be higher. Will we prioritize clever marketing that sells illusions, or build tools that respect builders' intelligence and intent? The answer will shape not just individual projects, but the very ethos of a more inclusive tech landscape.

Source: Ivan Cernja