Unless you're the only Comcast customer in a 5 (arbitrary number) mile radius, you are already sharing your bandwidth with others. Your cable modem connects you to a shared data stream.

If you don't have your own router/firewall between your LAN and Comcast's (or anyone else's) cable modem than you are vulnerable.

Want a quick demonstration? Call Comcast with an issue with their builtin router and watch as they are able to reset the passwords on the device and verify that all of the devices on the LAN are able to connect to it.

I kept the Xfinity wireless enabled. I use my own WiFi on my own firewall/router and see the potential of using the WiFi hotspots while traveling as greater than any imagined threats on my LAN.

As a fellow embedded engineer, neither do I. Mostly because the hardware engineer sits right next to me at the meetings. ;)

Really it's because we have documentation and engineering processes.

The demand for linux desktops from Dell isn't high enough to justify selling access via crapware.

The same can't be said for Android. Look at the uninstallable crapware that comes with phones from certain manufacturers. Don't you think the software company paid said phone manufacturer for the opportunity to not only be preinstalled on the phone but also to make it not able to be uninstalled?

The road to hell is paved with good intentions, and Microsoft is only merging onto the limited access highway already paved by the likes of Google, Facebook, and others.

We've already became complacent with allowing "diagnostic data" being sent back to the developers. It's going to be hard to change that attitude now that most people waited until after "the frog was boiled" before realizing that maybe we should be concerned.

Some of us was already waving the caution flag but our concerns were downplayed because others argued that sharing information was a small price to pay for access to free software and services.

I'm sure it was said "tongue in cheek".

We used to have this joke flow diagram in our meeting area which basically said (I can't do it justice):

1. Problem with a subsystem?
Hardware engineer: Looks like a software issue.
Software engineer: Looks like a hardware issue.

2. Running out of time?
Hardware engineer: We can emulate this missing hardware function in software.
Software engineer: We didn't need that feature.

Based on the currently available evidence, the expert panel concluded that HFCS does not appear to contribute to overweight and obesity any differently than do other energy sources.

I'll be interested in seeing any links you can provide that proves the contrary. It's been repeatedly shown that the increase in BMI has less to do with HFCS or sugar and more to do with increased caloric consumption in general. Over reliance on fast food and poor dietary choices are the leading causes of obesity.

Eat less sweets and you'll be okay. HFCS is no more dangerous than sugar. The obesity rate has very little to do with HFCS and more to do with increased caloric intake in general.

While I agree that "GPLv3 is shit" is a bit harsh, I don't see Apple not adopting GPLv3 for its open source projects as a bad thing.