Asked to choose a licence for my own creative works, both in a professional capacity and for personal uses, I would choose probably the weakest Creative Commons licence CC-BY.
I believe the attribution requirement (BY) is sufficient for me to be satisfied that I will receive recognition for my work when it is copied, reused in new contexts and remixed in new uses. These hopefully will be many and varied. My only regret is that I as an individual and even with the search power of Google will be unlikely ever to know the full extent of any reuse in scope and over time.
There is a temptation to add the not-for-commercial-use (NC) provision but I am persuaded by Erik Muller in his case against the NC provision. I feel the reduction in basic and beneficial uses that NC will force is real. Also any thought of sharing in a potential profit from commercial use is dashed by the inevitable complexity of legal agreements and the time taken to prepare them.
The share-alike (S) provision sounds excellent in principle but highly likely to be ignored when the work is reused. Also there appears to be no productive method of following the trail of sharing to police or even just to check that the provision has been followed. If my work is incorporated into a successful commercial work the attribution of my contribution would be valuable in raising a digital profile.
CC-BY is good enough for me.