What it will do, however, is make it difficult for CS departments to evaluate students based on homework, and it's not clear to me that this is such a bad thing. My experience with university CS courses has been that assignments are largely auto-graded, with systems akin to unit tests. In the common case, an overworked TA quickly spot-checks the source code to look for obvious signs of academic dishonesty, but that's it. So, universities are left with the following choice: give everyone an A, or grade differently. In the optimistic case, this might even produce a grading strategy that improves the value of a CS degree as a predictor of programming competence. It likely won't, in which case we have a status quo.
[0] This is a problem in its own right. I recently referred a grad student as a job candidate in my current company. I'm the most senior backend engineer, and this grad student was a highly competent contributor to my open-source project, which currently plays a strategic role in our backend. Said grad student is unusually bright and productive in a complex specialty (distributed systems), and I had to push our VP Eng very hard to hire him. His initial reaction was along the lines of "he doesn't have any industry experience, so we don't know if he's good". It gives me nausea to think about how many outstanding, 2-sigma engineers are rejected because companies don't know how to evaluate their talents. In the end, we ended up hiring him, but only because I stated that I would take full responsibility for his productivity. I regret nothing. </rant>