The "license hoop jumping overhead" is a legal requirement. If it ever comes out that your software contains code copied from some random web site, you're asking for a copyright infringement lawsuit. If you stick GPLed code in your code base, then your entire codebase is GPL and you're required to give away the source code on request. Even if something is MIT or BSD or similar license, you probably need to give the author credit in your software (this is why so many games have an "Open Source Licenses" option where you can read the licenses of various open source libraries they stuck in the game). If you forget to credit the author of the MIT licensed library you used, that's also a potential lawsuit.
In short, don't play loose with software licenses. The legal system has about as much interest in debating whether a company has to follow intellectual property laws as the tax collection agency does in debating whether you have to follow tax laws.
Yes I do understand the legal requirement for these kind of things, I was more trying to be understanding of why there was push back from the person the OP is describing. I also think anyone would be hard pressed to find an engineer who has _never_ copied anything from SO without attribution.
Plenty of us coded before SO, but I think you're being too general. Using SO to see examples of syntax is completely different than copying a chunk/function/page of original code someone wrote to solve a problem.
I absolutely have never put stack overflow code into a prodiction code base and I dont think Ive heard anyone talking about or seen anyone do that. I dont think that is typical all.
I use stack overflow to understand a concept or a technique frequently, but always type my own code from scratch.
In short, don't play loose with software licenses. The legal system has about as much interest in debating whether a company has to follow intellectual property laws as the tax collection agency does in debating whether you have to follow tax laws.