... do I sign up to perform the installation of Vista on these machines at 11,111 EUR per pop ?
Do these Government Organisations just play "pick a number and double it", when it comes to assigning a cost to these "upgrades" ???
I have an exploit for getting complete access to anyones house and all their posessions.
All you need if for the owner of your house to give you their keys, the codes to disable the burglar alarm, the name of the dog so that you can woo him with "ahhh, Rex, what a nice puppy you are", and hopefully let you know in advance when they will be on holiday, so you won't be disturbed.
WOW, I AM THE HAXXOR OF ALL YOUR HOUSES. ALL YOUR HOUSE BELONG TO US.
FFS, enough with these non-exploit exploits.
Anyone who has physical access to your PC means it's owned already. They can rip off the cover, add in a 2nd hard disk, swap over the disks in BIOS and boot, and still have access to all your files.
Isn't this just another case of some "security researcher" shouting to the world "what a clever boy I am" ?
Someone who expects to get paid for doing their work (i.e. the capitalist bit), but quite happily steals the food from other peoples mouths by refusing to pay for THEIR work (i.e. the anarchist bit).
Does this mean you are just another/. bod who wants free music for their iPod, pulls GB of data daily off the intarweb thingy killing everyone elses connections and forcing Comcast and the like to "shape" their traffic, and will use ANY justification to avoid just actually PAYING for the bloody song ?
I'll post the comment I was replying too, as you it seems are the ones with comprehension issues.
If Opensource was prevalent and closed-source rare or never used, then we could have better processors and more competition without worrying about that kind of compatibility.
Now, please explain how opensource / closedsource makes a damn of difference when talking about PROCESSORS (WHICH ARE HARDWARE DEVICES) !!!
The poster seems to be advocating that one version is better than another and somehow achieves the miracle of "working" for a KN bit processor, when only an N bit processor currently exists.
Just imagine if they had actually achieved to produce an OS that was technically equal to Linux or FreeBSD/
Yes, they'd still be sat in Momma Gates' basement, arguing over whether VI or EMACS is superior.
We'd have multiple branches (where each branch equates to two developers who BOTH think THEIR idea is better), like "Wobbly Windows", "Windy Windows", "Winddown Windows", "Win-glows (tm)" etc etc.
OSS has had more schisms than organised religions have managed in 2000 years.
I can run OSX 10.3 on my Windows box quite nicely via the PearPC emulator. Even got Internet on it via a software bridge on my LAN connection. I know it's not the same, but with all the talk of virtual machines etc, an emulator is close enough for comparison.
And that alone is enough to know that I'd NEVER waste my money on a real MAC. What a disaster of a UI, the whole shared menu thing at the top, and then the confusion over whether you've actually applied those settings, or have to click something else to make it work.
Red Green and Yellow dots... SO MUCH MORE intuitive than little pictures of the windows showing where they are in relation to the screen.
I could go on, but the fanbois might start knocking at my door...
OOO shiny is not enough justification to shell out 3000 bucks for one.
And to say a MAC runs faster than a native PC... well duh, it only has to run on a tiny subset of the worlds hardware, specifically that stuff ALSO made by Apple.
Try getting a bigger hard drive or upgrading your memory, and your shit out of luck though. You can pay Steve 200 bucks for a 20 dollar RAM chip, or you can do without. Wow, what a wonderful company to do business with, ripping off their customers with overpriced "proprietary hardware" for 20 years. And you have the GALL to slag Microsoft.
(I find it amusing that closed source software gets such a bad rap, yet close source hardware is okay).
I've added a TV Card, a 2nd IDE drive, a SATA drive, 1.5GB of extra RAM, and a DVDROM combo burner onto this PC here, and Windows has been kind enough to "just work" with all of it, regardless of brand or country of origin. (And before you start with the vista jokes, no I run XP SP2 and I'm quite happy with it ty... although I just put Vista on the kids PC downstairs, and have yet to find a game that DIDN'T run on it).
When Apple can say the same of their OSX, maybe I'll look again... or maybe I'll already be dead, because it's only 60 years until I'm 100 !!!
What you mean like Google when the bought DoubleClick.
Now if that ISN'T a prime example of someone with a monopoly (on search), using that power to get into another market (erm, what could we call it ? tracking people's habits online ?), then what is ?
But funnily enough, now I re-read my last sentence, I realise that Google were already... so it's not a new market for them after all.
Okay, let's try when Google bought YouTube... no, wait... damn it:-(
How would the open-source version of an 8 or 16 bit processor instruction be any better than the closed-source version... which is probably something like 0DA0 ?
In fact, how can assembler ever be considered closed source ? Ever heard of a disassembler mate ? With the exception of meaningful labels for pointers and subroutines, ALL assembler is inherently open.
The whole problem is about trying to maintain backwards compatibility for 30 year old hardware... nothing to do with your desire to climb on your OSS soapbox at every opportunity.
And what exactly will a 32-bit operating system DO with a 64-bit value returned all at once ?
Even is there is some pseudoclass called "veryverylongint" or whatever, internally he's having to split / join as necessary everytime you want to do some math on it, increment or decrement it etc.
This is the same as what happens to 16 bit apps that needs to run in a 32 bit environment... he needs 32 bit values returned piecemeal anyway. That is what backwards compatibility boils down to in most cases, then handling of values that were never imagined at the time the original app was written on a "lower-bit" operating system.
And as has been pointed out, there is a function in NET to return it all at once. So everyone is happy yes ?
Sorry for trotting out that old cliche, it has very little to do with my opinion, but we must supply a subject so there you go.
In my opinion, where a minor is involved, i.e. still the legal responsibility of a parent / guardian, the privacy rights of the minor are decided by that parent / guardian.
However if the missing person is not a minor, then they have every right to their privacy too.
Just as in a hospital, a consent form must be signed before an operation by either the person in question or parent / guardian in the case of minors, then this should ALSO apply before a cell company hands over the private records of an individual.
It's a double edged sword, balancing the privacy of the individual against the possible benefits to police / other authorities in tracking them down in emergency cases.
But given authorities appauling record when it comes to the rights of an individual, who defines WHAT is constituted as an "emergency"
They are missing ? They are suspected of a crime ? They didn't pay their taxes ? They have a goatee and kneel down to pray on a mat ?
If only the bloody authorities could be trusted to behave in the manner we elected them to behave in, this wouldn't even be a topic for discussion. Common sense says that it might be useful to find someone by their cell records... but then authority comes along and abuses that priviledge for whatever purpose THEY deem to be valid, and screw up the whole thing.
Hoover hasn't just fallen into the common usage, it's become a verb of sorts.
When I call my wife and ask her what she's up to, and she responds "Doing the hoovering", is that a Trademark Violation (even if the actual brand she is using isn't a Hoover) ???
When you search for a new vacuum cleaner, and use the word hoover, you aren't specifically looking for brands by that company alone... so in that case I think it's only fair that competitors ads are served also. A trademark is not a monopoly on the English Language, and anyone can sell a "hoover"... only Hoover can sell a "Hoover"... notice the important difference.
a lot of decoy file are going to appear on P2P networks now!
What, because there weren't any fake files before ?
OO, let's have a look at the availability of "die hard 4"... hmm... 23 sources, 22 sources, and right at the top 55,789 sources.. and it's a "wmv" file too and only 6MB (must be some new video compression algo to fit a 2 hour movie in 6MB)... wow, I should download that right away !!!
I wish I'd taken that train of thought a little further before clicking submit.
IF Ubuntu (or release of your choice), WAS more like Windows, just think how much higher the adoption rate would be for it. Imagine how EASY it would be if you could show people with only a Windows background, "look, you do the same things and get the same result - only this one is free, doesn't come cluttered with DRM, isn't susceptible to malware etc etc".
It could be the BIG selling point, if only you'd give in to the pressure. But comments like this just perpetuate the "elitist" attitude of Open Source... it's not necessarily "better" because it's "different"... in fact I think the opposite.
If only you'd see the wood for the trees, you could have your open source "revolution" we've been waiting for for 25 years.
This entire review is focused on that Ubuntu should work and act just like Windows
Yes, because that would be FAR too easy... real geeks need things to be unique to their "domain", so they can lord over the rest of the plebs with their advanced technical knowhow.
Until you actually get burgled, then have to go through hoops to get your insurance to actually pay out, and then watch your premiums for the next year increase by a factor of 10 because you have now been classified as in "a bad risk area"... (i.e. bad risk of the insurance company having to pay out again).
Any fool can create a DAEMON or service running under the root account, and then allow user accounts to utilise that service to bypass UAC.
This is no different from Linux and I suppose Mac also.
The "trick" is to get the DAEMON running as root WITHOUT having to deal with UAC, root permissions or whatever.
This is not "news", just typical anti-microsoft FUD.
I'm sorry, I know UAC is a pain, but in general, (MS bias aside), I've found it does exactly what it says on the tin. I installed Vista on my PC at home, have a root account for Admin purposes, and then set up User accounts for the wife and kids.
On their accounts, every action that is potentially dangerous requires my Admin account password... so how is this ANY different from a linux system where you'll need to do su and supply the root password ???
I'll tell you... because it's easier to show a popup window that the wife and kids can understand rather than telling them they'll need to go into a shell, type su and the root password, before they can even use it.
"Double click on icon, UAC popup, call Dad to approve it"... this is exactly the behaviour I expect out of UAC, and it's exactly what I get.
Note I'm not particularly a MS fanboy, and use Linux webservers all day in a LAMP environment for my job as web programmer... but to me UAC IS working correctly... certain groups just choose to perceive it as painful for their own agendas.
You know, even a 60 second "grace period" to edit your posts would be wonderful for those of us with lots to say but little time to wonder about the wierd "default" settings of Slashdot.
Come on guys, fine, it might be HTML formatted but when I type a CR+LF in the textarea, is is SO difficult to understand that I mean <br> to be put in the finished article ???
Curse that combo box, and curse that preview button.
1. Take a standard PC, probably running Windows (to be as insecure as possible). 2. Enclose it in a crappy wooden box with a diebold logo on it, that can be opened with a minibar key. 3. ? 4. Profit
1. Take a standard PC, probably running Windows (to be as insecure as possible).
2. Enclose it in a crappy wooden box with a diebold logo on it, that can be opened with a minibar key.
3. ?
4. Profit
Simply send the file you wish to archive to 10 of your friends.
Promise them good fortune, good health, good luck, or even a good $1, if they will:-
a) Keep the file for one year in a safe place. b) After one year, distribute the file to 10 of their friends under the same conditions.
Even if only 1 friend out of 10 follows your instructions, you have maintained a redundant copy in a remote location and guaranteed the propogation / continuation of that redundant copy for the following year. Cost $1 per year.
Rinse and repeat for 1000 years:-)
Hell, if pyramid scams can work for Avon, Amway, Forever Living, etc. they can damn well work for me too:-)
The problem is run into in the nature of the service being offered. This isn't merely storage, they are distributing the works.
They are NOT distributing it !!!
Distribute - verb (used with object), -uted, -uting.
1. to divide and give out in shares; deal out; allot.
2. to disperse through a space or over an area; spread; scatter.
3. to promote, sell, and ship or deliver (an item or line of merchandise) to individual customers, esp. in a specified region or area.
4. to pass out or deliver (mail, newspapers, etc.) to intended recipients.
5. to divide into distinct phases: The process was distributed into three stages.
6. to divide into classes: These plants are distributed into 22 classes.
They are not dividing the file into pieces, nor sharing it amongst any other parties. They are merely serving it back to the original owner when requested. I would imagine that definitions 3 and 4 could apply, but ONLY in the context of the original owner... no plurals involved.
Your argument is like accusing a bank of "distributing" your money when you pay a cheque into the bank and then use an ATM at a different branch to withdraw the SAME money that BELONGS TO YOU !!!
The way it seems to run, this isn't a common carrier thing that is being run in good faith, like say any random hosting company, this is a company that is advertising that it will distribute copies of music that you bought from someone else to you on any device you want.
There's that word again:-( You really don't get it do you ?
That changes the rules, they can't do that without a license, even if you have 5000 copies at home.
When I purchase a CD, fair use says I may make backup copies for my own personal use. It does not dictate that those backup copies MUST remain within my own home, otherwise anyone with a cassette tape in their car that they copied from a CD they own would also be "breaking the law" everytime the car left the driveway.
If I choose to put my copies in a bank, they remain my property, and the bank does not "distribute" them to ANY third party. Likewise if I choose to store my data in an online file storage repository, and said repository ONLY returns that data to me when I supply MY username and password, it is exactly the same thing.
Don't let your shortsightedness blind you to the reality... a URL with "mp3" in it does not automatically equate to "file sharing".
Slashdot Mirror
... do I sign up to perform the installation of Vista on these machines at 11,111 EUR per pop ? Do these Government Organisations just play "pick a number and double it", when it comes to assigning a cost to these "upgrades" ???
For the price they currently want for these wizzbang solid state devides, I could buy a small data warehouse in Springfield, MA.
... wants to have someone ELSE's cake and eat it, too.
;-)
There fixed that for you
I have an exploit for getting complete access to anyones house and all their posessions.
All you need if for the owner of your house to give you their keys, the codes to disable the burglar alarm, the name of the dog so that you can woo him with "ahhh, Rex, what a nice puppy you are", and hopefully let you know in advance when they will be on holiday, so you won't be disturbed.
WOW, I AM THE HAXXOR OF ALL YOUR HOUSES. ALL YOUR HOUSE BELONG TO US.
FFS, enough with these non-exploit exploits.
Anyone who has physical access to your PC means it's owned already. They can rip off the cover, add in a 2nd hard disk, swap over the disks in BIOS and boot, and still have access to all your files.
Isn't this just another case of some "security researcher" shouting to the world "what a clever boy I am" ?
What the f**k is an "anarcho-capitalist" ?
/. bod who wants free music for their iPod, pulls GB of data daily off the intarweb thingy killing everyone elses connections and forcing Comcast and the like to "shape" their traffic, and will use ANY justification to avoid just actually PAYING for the bloody song ?
Someone who expects to get paid for doing their work (i.e. the capitalist bit), but quite happily steals the food from other peoples mouths by refusing to pay for THEIR work (i.e. the anarchist bit).
Does this mean you are just another
Or perhaps I read you completely wrong ?
Putting your head between your portable kettle and your microwave emitting kettle charger can seriously damage your health.
I'll post the comment I was replying too, as you it seems are the ones with comprehension issues.
If Opensource was prevalent and closed-source rare or never used, then we could have better processors and more competition without worrying about that kind of compatibility.
Now, please explain how opensource / closedsource makes a damn of difference when talking about PROCESSORS (WHICH ARE HARDWARE DEVICES) !!!
The poster seems to be advocating that one version is better than another and somehow achieves the miracle of "working" for a KN bit processor, when only an N bit processor currently exists.
Now go away and troll somewhere else.
Just imagine if they had actually achieved to produce an OS that was technically equal to Linux or FreeBSD/
Yes, they'd still be sat in Momma Gates' basement, arguing over whether VI or EMACS is superior.
We'd have multiple branches (where each branch equates to two developers who BOTH think THEIR idea is better), like "Wobbly Windows", "Windy Windows", "Winddown Windows", "Win-glows (tm)" etc etc.
OSS has had more schisms than organised religions have managed in 2000 years.
I can run OSX 10.3 on my Windows box quite nicely via the PearPC emulator. Even got Internet on it via a software bridge on my LAN connection. I know it's not the same, but with all the talk of virtual machines etc, an emulator is close enough for comparison.
... SO MUCH MORE intuitive than little pictures of the windows showing where they are in relation to the screen.
...
... well duh, it only has to run on a tiny subset of the worlds hardware, specifically that stuff ALSO made by Apple.
... although I just put Vista on the kids PC downstairs, and have yet to find a game that DIDN'T run on it).
... or maybe I'll already be dead, because it's only 60 years until I'm 100 !!!
And that alone is enough to know that I'd NEVER waste my money on a real MAC. What a disaster of a UI, the whole shared menu thing at the top, and then the confusion over whether you've actually applied those settings, or have to click something else to make it work.
Red Green and Yellow dots
I could go on, but the fanbois might start knocking at my door
OOO shiny is not enough justification to shell out 3000 bucks for one.
And to say a MAC runs faster than a native PC
Try getting a bigger hard drive or upgrading your memory, and your shit out of luck though. You can pay Steve 200 bucks for a 20 dollar RAM chip, or you can do without. Wow, what a wonderful company to do business with, ripping off their customers with overpriced "proprietary hardware" for 20 years. And you have the GALL to slag Microsoft.
(I find it amusing that closed source software gets such a bad rap, yet close source hardware is okay).
I've added a TV Card, a 2nd IDE drive, a SATA drive, 1.5GB of extra RAM, and a DVDROM combo burner onto this PC here, and Windows has been kind enough to "just work" with all of it, regardless of brand or country of origin. (And before you start with the vista jokes, no I run XP SP2 and I'm quite happy with it ty
When Apple can say the same of their OSX, maybe I'll look again
What you mean like Google when the bought DoubleClick.
... so it's not a new market for them after all.
... no, wait ... damn it :-(
Now if that ISN'T a prime example of someone with a monopoly (on search), using that power to get into another market (erm, what could we call it ? tracking people's habits online ?), then what is ?
But funnily enough, now I re-read my last sentence, I realise that Google were already
Okay, let's try when Google bought YouTube
How much funding do these people get ?
... the original was bigger than 162 x 169 pixels also ;-)
It's obvious they've just used the BBC testcard and Photoshopped out the girl, clown and blackboard.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/cult/classic/classic/images/640/testcard.jpg
Stands out a mile, obvious fake
Pardon my french, but what a load of bollocks.
... which is probably something like 0DA0 ?
... nothing to do with your desire to climb on your OSS soapbox at every opportunity.
How would the open-source version of an 8 or 16 bit processor instruction be any better than the closed-source version
In fact, how can assembler ever be considered closed source ? Ever heard of a disassembler mate ? With the exception of meaningful labels for pointers and subroutines, ALL assembler is inherently open.
The whole problem is about trying to maintain backwards compatibility for 30 year old hardware
And what exactly will a 32-bit operating system DO with a 64-bit value returned all at once ?
... he needs 32 bit values returned piecemeal anyway. That is what backwards compatibility boils down to in most cases, then handling of values that were never imagined at the time the original app was written on a "lower-bit" operating system.
Even is there is some pseudoclass called "veryverylongint" or whatever, internally he's having to split / join as necessary everytime you want to do some math on it, increment or decrement it etc.
This is the same as what happens to 16 bit apps that needs to run in a 32 bit environment
And as has been pointed out, there is a function in NET to return it all at once. So everyone is happy yes ?
Sorry for trotting out that old cliche, it has very little to do with my opinion, but we must supply a subject so there you go.
... but then authority comes along and abuses that priviledge for whatever purpose THEY deem to be valid, and screw up the whole thing.
In my opinion, where a minor is involved, i.e. still the legal responsibility of a parent / guardian, the privacy rights of the minor are decided by that parent / guardian.
However if the missing person is not a minor, then they have every right to their privacy too.
Just as in a hospital, a consent form must be signed before an operation by either the person in question or parent / guardian in the case of minors, then this should ALSO apply before a cell company hands over the private records of an individual.
It's a double edged sword, balancing the privacy of the individual against the possible benefits to police / other authorities in tracking them down in emergency cases.
But given authorities appauling record when it comes to the rights of an individual, who defines WHAT is constituted as an "emergency"
They are missing ?
They are suspected of a crime ?
They didn't pay their taxes ?
They have a goatee and kneel down to pray on a mat ?
If only the bloody authorities could be trusted to behave in the manner we elected them to behave in, this wouldn't even be a topic for discussion. Common sense says that it might be useful to find someone by their cell records
Hoover hasn't just fallen into the common usage, it's become a verb of sorts. When I call my wife and ask her what she's up to, and she responds "Doing the hoovering", is that a Trademark Violation (even if the actual brand she is using isn't a Hoover) ??? When you search for a new vacuum cleaner, and use the word hoover, you aren't specifically looking for brands by that company alone ... so in that case I think it's only fair that competitors ads are served also. A trademark is not a monopoly on the English Language, and anyone can sell a "hoover" ... only Hoover can sell a "Hoover" ... notice the important difference.
Umm, the same way you did :-)
a lot of decoy file are going to appear on P2P networks now!
... hmm ... 23 sources, 22 sources, and right at the top 55,789 sources .. and it's a "wmv" file too and only 6MB (must be some new video compression algo to fit a 2 hour movie in 6MB) ... wow, I should download that right away !!!
What, because there weren't any fake files before ?
OO, let's have a look at the availability of "die hard 4"
<sarcasm>
I wish I'd taken that train of thought a little further before clicking submit.
... it's not necessarily "better" because it's "different" ... in fact I think the opposite.
IF Ubuntu (or release of your choice), WAS more like Windows, just think how much higher the adoption rate would be for it. Imagine how EASY it would be if you could show people with only a Windows background, "look, you do the same things and get the same result - only this one is free, doesn't come cluttered with DRM, isn't susceptible to malware etc etc".
It could be the BIG selling point, if only you'd give in to the pressure. But comments like this just perpetuate the "elitist" attitude of Open Source
If only you'd see the wood for the trees, you could have your open source "revolution" we've been waiting for for 25 years.
This entire review is focused on that Ubuntu should work and act just like Windows
... real geeks need things to be unique to their "domain", so they can lord over the rest of the plebs with their advanced technical knowhow.
Yes, because that would be FAR too easy
</sarcasm>
Until you actually get burgled, then have to go through hoops to get your insurance to actually pay out, and then watch your premiums for the next year increase by a factor of 10 because you have now been classified as in "a bad risk area" ... (i.e. bad risk of the insurance company having to pay out again).
Any fool can create a DAEMON or service running under the root account, and then allow user accounts to utilise that service to bypass UAC.
... so how is this ANY different from a linux system where you'll need to do su and supply the root password ???
... because it's easier to show a popup window that the wife and kids can understand rather than telling them they'll need to go into a shell, type su and the root password, before they can even use it.
... this is exactly the behaviour I expect out of UAC, and it's exactly what I get.
... but to me UAC IS working correctly ... certain groups just choose to perceive it as painful for their own agendas.
This is no different from Linux and I suppose Mac also.
The "trick" is to get the DAEMON running as root WITHOUT having to deal with UAC, root permissions or whatever.
This is not "news", just typical anti-microsoft FUD.
I'm sorry, I know UAC is a pain, but in general, (MS bias aside), I've found it does exactly what it says on the tin. I installed Vista on my PC at home, have a root account for Admin purposes, and then set up User accounts for the wife and kids.
On their accounts, every action that is potentially dangerous requires my Admin account password
I'll tell you
"Double click on icon, UAC popup, call Dad to approve it"
Note I'm not particularly a MS fanboy, and use Linux webservers all day in a LAMP environment for my job as web programmer
You know, even a 60 second "grace period" to edit your posts would be wonderful for those of us with lots to say but little time to wonder about the wierd "default" settings of Slashdot.
Come on guys, fine, it might be HTML formatted but when I type a CR+LF in the textarea, is is SO difficult to understand that I mean <br> to be put in the finished article ???
Curse that combo box, and curse that preview button.
1. Take a standard PC, probably running Windows (to be as insecure as possible).
2. Enclose it in a crappy wooden box with a diebold logo on it, that can be opened with a minibar key.
3. ?
4. Profit
1. Take a standard PC, probably running Windows (to be as insecure as possible). 2. Enclose it in a crappy wooden box with a diebold logo on it, that can be opened with a minibar key. 3. ? 4. Profit
Simply send the file you wish to archive to 10 of your friends.
:-
:-)
:-)
Promise them good fortune, good health, good luck, or even a good $1, if they will
a) Keep the file for one year in a safe place.
b) After one year, distribute the file to 10 of their friends under the same conditions.
Even if only 1 friend out of 10 follows your instructions, you have maintained a redundant copy in a remote location and guaranteed the propogation / continuation of that redundant copy for the following year. Cost $1 per year.
Rinse and repeat for 1000 years
Hell, if pyramid scams can work for Avon, Amway, Forever Living, etc. they can damn well work for me too
The problem is run into in the nature of the service being offered. This isn't merely storage, they are distributing the works.
... no plurals involved.
:-( You really don't get it do you ?
... a URL with "mp3" in it does not automatically equate to "file sharing".
They are NOT distributing it !!!
Distribute - verb (used with object), -uted, -uting.
1. to divide and give out in shares; deal out; allot.
2. to disperse through a space or over an area; spread; scatter.
3. to promote, sell, and ship or deliver (an item or line of merchandise) to individual customers, esp. in a specified region or area.
4. to pass out or deliver (mail, newspapers, etc.) to intended recipients.
5. to divide into distinct phases: The process was distributed into three stages.
6. to divide into classes: These plants are distributed into 22 classes.
They are not dividing the file into pieces, nor sharing it amongst any other parties. They are merely serving it back to the original owner when requested. I would imagine that definitions 3 and 4 could apply, but ONLY in the context of the original owner
Your argument is like accusing a bank of "distributing" your money when you pay a cheque into the bank and then use an ATM at a different branch to withdraw the SAME money that BELONGS TO YOU !!!
The way it seems to run, this isn't a common carrier thing that is being run in good faith, like say any random hosting company, this is a company that is advertising that it will distribute copies of music that you bought from someone else to you on any device you want.
There's that word again
That changes the rules, they can't do that without a license, even if you have 5000 copies at home.
When I purchase a CD, fair use says I may make backup copies for my own personal use. It does not dictate that those backup copies MUST remain within my own home, otherwise anyone with a cassette tape in their car that they copied from a CD they own would also be "breaking the law" everytime the car left the driveway.
If I choose to put my copies in a bank, they remain my property, and the bank does not "distribute" them to ANY third party. Likewise if I choose to store my data in an online file storage repository, and said repository ONLY returns that data to me when I supply MY username and password, it is exactly the same thing.
Don't let your shortsightedness blind you to the reality