Code Through

[JayCastro]

So i want to do my code through on something i read in an article that i had done as a pin in yellow dig. Is that okay or should i go with something else?

[jamisoncrawford]

Hi Jacob, I think that should be fine so long as you elaborate on it quite a bit more than your initial pin. Is there any way I can help?

[JayCastro]

Hi, one last question while going through the package and researching for my code through, i saw someone make an interesting graph that highlights the strength of the package. Am i able to use there example by giving them credit ? and if so how would i go about giving them credit ?

[jamisoncrawford]

@JayCastro is the code provided and, if so, why not recreate it with your own data and some modifications?

Thanks for asking about this. Code and plagiarism is a blurry line, especially because so many coding solutions are used over and over again. I think it would be great if you attribute the original visualization to her or him. You can create a "Works Cited" section and use a standard citation method or, if you'd like to to it in-line, just credit the creator and use a hyperlink to the original work.

If you modify it, it's not a bad idea to still do this anyways.

Plagiarizing language is typically pretty clear cut. Even if you paraphrase in a manner very similar to the original, it's still considered literary and academic integrity.

Coding, on the other hand, is kind of like sampling in hip hop. You've got swing, soul, funk, blues, classic rock, disco, etc. created by other artists, and the instrumental breaks, especially in early deejaying, are sampled and played on repeat. Early hip hop parties were people having a good time and listening to deejays listening to loops of the samples (i.e. instrumental breaks, hence "break dancing").

Today, so many breaks are sampled and repurposed - and if they are propriety, then they are distorted, increased or decreased in BPMs (tempo), and they create the foundation for rappers to lay down dope bars.

So feel free to sample an "instrumental break" from others' code (in my opinion), but make sure you've got your own rhymes to build on that foundation.

---

That was somewhat convoluted but as I said, it's a blurry thing.

[lecy]

@JayCastro what is the example? That might help provide some guidance.

If you are introducing functionality in the package so the graph is just an example it is fine to recreate it directly and cite it.

Citations are a little weird. Follow traditional paper citation rules: using an X graph helps highlight the results (author name, retrieved from [website.url] June, 2020).

If I use code directly I will also add a comment in the chunk for attribution, which is the equivalent of putting text in quotation marks in a paper.

# example provided by jamison crawford 
# retrieved from https://github.com/jamisoncrawford/coolproject/example.md

start code here

The important thing is to not try to pass off someone else's work as your own.

The best way to learn is to start with code that works, and adapt it. That is equally true for beginners and for experts that are starting to use new packages or languages. As a result, the process of "writing code" typically involves a lot of cut and paste as a starting point.

As Jamison mentioned, the nature of original work in open source contexts is closer to Kanye West's Golddigger (parts of existing songs combined, multiple collaborators, many improvements before release) than Bon Iver's For Emma Forever Ago (recorded alone in a cabin in the woods).

The hardest thing to do is attribute logic. StackOverflow is really helpful to see how to approach a problem, but then you adapt the logic to your own data and context. But you are drawing from the discussion in the thread, not citing a specific person. I often bookmark discussions by adding comments in code for my own reference, but it also serves as attribution.

[JayCastro]

okay i did it both ways to show that i only manipulated the template they give me for different results and to show he was the mastermind behind the whole thing. thank you