Slashdot Mirror
Use Code From Stack Overflow? You Must Provide Attribution (stackexchange.com)
An anonymous reader writes: Have you ever used Stack Overflow to answer a question about some code you're working on? Most people who write code on a regular basis have done so, and this sometimes involves copying code snippets. Well, starting on March 1, copying code from Stack Overflow will require you to attribute that code. Code published by contributors to SO will be covered by the MIT license. Users copying that code don't have to include the full license in their code, as it usually requires, but they do have to provide a URL as a comment in their code, or some similar level of attribution. This change applies to other sites in the Stack Exchange network, as well.
The SO community is widely criticizing the change, citing problems with the decision-making process that led to it and complications that may arise from mandating attribution. Why did SO make the change in the first place? They say "it's always been a little ambiguous how CC-BY-SA covers code. This has led to uncertainty among conscientious developers as they've struggled to understand what (if anything) the license requires of them when grabbing a few lines of code from a post on Stack Exchange. Uncertainty is a drag on productivity, for you and for us, and we feel obligated to make code use more clear."
The SO community is widely criticizing the change, citing problems with the decision-making process that led to it and complications that may arise from mandating attribution. Why did SO make the change in the first place? They say "it's always been a little ambiguous how CC-BY-SA covers code. This has led to uncertainty among conscientious developers as they've struggled to understand what (if anything) the license requires of them when grabbing a few lines of code from a post on Stack Exchange. Uncertainty is a drag on productivity, for you and for us, and we feel obligated to make code use more clear."
Of all of the problems plaguing SO, this attribution crap is the least important of them.
I was having a debate with several high ranking programmers on SO about needing to mark an INT volatile or having to use Interlocked atomic writes to make sure the class variable gets flushed to memory after the method call finishes. They all lashed out at me saying I was horribly wrong and the variable could be held in registers, among other things, and is only guaranteed to work as intended from the standpoint of a single thread. My argument is that unless the method discards the data or inlines the method call, the method has to eventually flush the data from registers back to memory before returning control.
.Net code is on GitHub, it turns out Microsoft's own code for stuff like semaphores are written exactly the way I proposed. Many SO people don't understand anything, only have enough knowledge to superficially seem like they know what they're talking about. They are the poster children of Cargo Cult Programmers.
Now that