• acting and
• blackmailing,

• psychological terror and
• hate crimes,

to the authorities for not becoming a confidant or even an accomplice.

Style of Speed Further steps
By pure happenstance, we developed a new Thermal Protection System (TPS) for hypersonic flight and atmospheric (re)entry, and improved one of our other TPSs even more significantly. Potentially, we can integrate both for generting and exploiting synergies.
Forget your tiles and aeroshells made of silicon, carbon, ceramics, and other very sensitive materials.

02.October.2017
Ontonics Further steps
When thinking about one of the new magic materials (see the Further steps of the 30th of September 2017), we concluded at first that we had developed a new material but later we saw that we had developed a whole new material class.

SOPR #21
First of all, the last actings of the manufacturers Daimler and Volkswagen, as well as the companies Amazon and International Business Machines have proven once again that

The true remaining and once again recurring questions are only related with details.

One of these questions is about the balance between fees for hardware and software items of our Ontologic System (OS) and Ontoscope (Os), and shares for web services and e-commerce realized with our OS and Os.
This time, we approached the matter from another point of view by distinguishing between access places based on our OS and Os to the Ontologic Net (ON), Ontologic Web (OW), and Ontologic uniVerse (OV) of our OS respectively in our OS, but this brings us always back to another one of these questions that is about the unit of measurement mentioned in the issue #20 of the 1st of October 2017 (yesterday) once again.

With our OS and its ON, OW, and OV we have built up our very own little world, universe, paradise, or even reality, that we enjoy by accessing it with an Os and even living in it eventually. This view and both questions lead us to the field of argument technology somehow and more questions like the following:

Maybe we should begin the discussion with

In relation with the latter option, let us have another look how another company handles the e-commerce on its online market platform. "eBay generates revenue by a complex system of fees for services, listing product features, and a Final Value Fee for sales proceeds by sellers. As of November 2012, the US-based eBay.com charges $0.10 to $2, based on the opening or reserve price, as an insertion fee for a basic auction-style listing without any adornments. The Final Value Fee amounts to 10% of the total amount of the sale, which is the price of the item plus shipping charges. Fixed-price listings have an insertion fee of $0.30, and the final value fee varies based on category and total amount of the sale (e.g., 13% for DVDs & Movies up to $50). The UK-based ebay.co.uk takes from £0.15 to a maximum rate of £3 per £100 for an ordinary listing and up to 10% of the final price. Reduced Final Value Fees are available to business registered customers.

Under US law, a state cannot require sellers located outside the state to collect a sales tax, making purchases more attractive to buyers. Although some state laws require resident purchasers to pay use tax on out-of-state purchases, it is not a common practice. However, sellers that operate as a business do follow state tax regulations on eBay transactions. However Value Added Tax (VAT), the EU countries' sales tax, is different. eBay requires sellers to include the VAT element in their listing price and not as an add-on and thus profits by collecting fees based not only on the sale price "ex VAT" but also on the VAT. In a similar manner eBay also charges its Final Value Fees on all shipping charges."

Style of Speed Further steps
We continued with the transformation of Style of Speed.

The image below shows a design of a landspeeder that we took as a source of inspiration for example for one of the models of our 91x series based on our Speeder system platform, which again was mentioned in the Further steps of the 28th of July 2017 and 24th of August 2017 already on the one hand and could also be an airspeeder on the other hand, as it is the case with all of such designs (see also the Further steps of the 14th of February 2017).

© :(

Sadly to say, we were unable to find out who the designer is.

03.October.2017
Comment of the Day #1
"The heartbreaker got a broken heart."
What a Petty!

See also the Comment of the Day and the Originals of the 24th of September 2014.

Comment of the Day #2
Stronginium™
Hover van™
Hover gondola™
Hover yacht™

Original vs. Inspiration
1. row: Chris Dunlop, Ferrari P3 landspeeder
2. row: Ivan Tantsiura, TSC landspeeder
3. row: Syd Mead, US Steel Space Age Car (1960s)
4. row: Syd Mead, The Baroque commuter
5. row: Syd Mead, Cyber Race Arrival (1991)
6. row: Syd Mead, Mobilage (1985)
7. row: Sony Pictures Entertainment, Elysium, Orbital Transport Vehicle (OTV) (2012, 2013)
8. row: Danny Gardner, Entry to Syd Mead competition
9. row: Bela Kotroczo, Orbittrans, aka. Space Ladybird (2012)

© Syd Mead, Ivan Tantsiura, Chris Dunlop, Sony Pictures Entertainment, Danny Gardner, and Bela Kotroczo

Please visit the websites of the painters and designers. But take some time for this.
See also the Style of Speed Further steps of today.

Ontonics Further steps
We gave our new material class developed yesterday the provisional name Stronginium, because it is very strong. The name will change when we present one of its materials for the first time.

We also developed a second new material of our material class Stronginium.

SOPR #22
In relation with creating our license model we have to admit that we are playing with the thought of introducing a more diversified variant that is a little more complex, specifically when we look at

• fields of mobility and logistics, and
• Ontologic Subsystems and Ontologic Applications listed in the Terms of the 21st Century, which are not included in the basic fee for the reproduction of our Ontologic System,

and

Ontologic Web Further steps
We have added a new platform and three services to our Ontologic Web (OW) that are based on its original and unique features.

Style of Speed Further steps
In relation with the Original vs. Inspiration of today we would like to give the following informations in the same order the images are shown:

• Veneto, such as Verona, Padova==Padua, Vicenza, and Riva Del Garda==Lake Garda, as well as
• Lumbardia==Lombardy, such as Lago di Como==Lake Como

(see also the Style of Speed Further steps of the 13th of May 2017).

Furthermore, we are pleased to announce the start of our Style of Speed Hover Division Competition.
The winner gets 1% of our Hover Division™ worth 1 billion U.S. Dollar (*).
Participants have to create proposals about how to monetize our Hover Division in the best way addressing points like:

• flight sharing,
• taxi,
• public transport,
• transport,
• drone delivery,
• etc.

Qualified is every entity that has a market capitalization of at least 20 billion U.S. Dollar.
The winner must provide monetary support for the realization of the proposal.
A proposal should comprise around 20 to 50 pages, but can have more pages if required for a complete presentation.
The related material can be found on the websites of OntomaX and Style of Speed.
The proposals will be held confidential and remain the properties of the participants.
The deadline is the 31st of December 2017 but we recommend to be as quick as possible.
Good luck!

* We keep all of our rights, including the right to reject a proposal if it does not have the required quantities and qualities.

04.October.2017
Clarification
We have also explained in the past, that the development of our Ontologic System (OS)

• removed the ballast of ontologies, like other removed the ballast of the Extensible Markup Language (XML) by using the JavaScript Object Notation (JSON), but also
• combined ontology and logic to ontologics, because the semantic web ontologies are not sufficient (see for example KIND based on MIX).

This raises the question why ontologies are still important. The answer is relatively simple. As all the many advantages of XML are lost by the substitution of XML with JSON, all the many advantages of ontologies are lost by the substitution of ontology-based paradigms, such as the OO 1, OO 2, OO 3 paradigms, with paradigms that do not use ontologies. But with OO 3 we also added a way that allows us to switch or move between the OO 1, OO 2, and OO 3 paradigms at runtime (see the Clarification #2 of the 5th of June 2016), that allows us to also use the ontologies written in XML and eventually to retain all advantages of ontologies, which also resulted in the Bridge from Natural Intelligence (NI) to Artificial Intelligence (AI) in the end.

With ontologies we have

The OS and OO 3 are coherent and seamless, and look easy, but only after we said it.

OntoLix and OntoLinux Further steps
We have talked about some related points already in the past but it might be that we have not explained how the addressing in the Ontologic Net (ON), Ontologic Web (OW), and Ontologic uniVerse (OV) functions and how it all fits together when viewed from a more technological direction.

• "[t]he Semantic (World Wide) Web effort [that] provides standards and technologies for the definition, exchange, and syndication of Metadata, Topic Maps, Ontologies, and Ontologics, and for collaborative information, knowledge, and process management, as well as the creation of open intelligent collaborative virtual environments" (see the webpage Introduction of the website of OntoLinux), and
• dynamic graphs or hypergraphs with graph rewriting, like for example a data model compatible with a conceptual graph, semantic network, knowledge graph, or other such semantic structures for storing, presenting, searching, retrieving, and interchanging knowledge, that resembles the structure and function of a brain with its neurons and synapses (see the Clarification #2 of the 10th of September 2012, and also the Ontonics Further steps of the 27th of September 2017 for example),

which taken together also leads us straight to the so-called Dynamic Semantic Web (DSW), and the fields of cybernetic ontology, proper ontology, and philosophy, and eventually back again to our all encompasing field of Ontonics and Ontologic(-Oriented) (OO 3) paradigma, Ontologic System (OS), and Ontoscope (Os).

Nevertheless, it would be nice to get a representation as the substitute of for example an input field of a search engine or an address bar of a web browser. One possibility is to take a simple graph or even better a mind map (see the project Zooming Mind Map). In this mind map a

In general, every other way is possible that uses the OS features (e.g. Caliber/Calibre, Bridge from Natural Intelligence (NI) to Artificial Intelligence (AI), and Softbionics and Artificial Intelligence 3), components, and applications.
Taaadaaa!!!

SOPR #23
We found our statements given in the Ontonics Further steps of the 11th of May 2016 once again, which shows that we were already working on this license model.

So the companies are already implementing our Ontologic System (OS) and we are already working (again) on the formal and legal requirements of a Terms of Service (ToS) and the license model, specifically on the answers to the questions what kinds of

should be imposed.
As we said in the last past, our goal is a license model that is harmonized and as flat as possible.

We also corrected the text passage "Ontologic Application and ON, OW, and OV Service (OAOOOS or OAO³S) with an OS instance and an Os device" with the text passage "Ontologic Application and ON, OW, and OV Service (OAOOOS or OAO³S) with an OS instance or an Os device or both".
If we are really confronted with such contract details then we have to think about another license model. At least there will be no 10 years contract anymore but only a 1 year contract or a 6, 3, or 1 months contract.

A final and binding decision will be made As Soon As Possible (ASAP) in the limits already discussed in the last weeks.

05.October.2017
Comment of the Day #1
Voxelbook™
Voxel bud™

Comment of the Day #2
"It is an Ontoscope, too."
See also the Comment of the Day of the 13th of September 2017.

SOPR #24
First of all, the last actings of the company Google have proven once again that

• slogan "AI + software + hardware" of Google, which translates to "SoftBionics (SB) + software + hardware" and eventually reduces to Ontologic System (OS), and also
• fact that we have realized our unforeseeable and unexpected vision to 100%,

and

• classification of hardware for accounting,
• fees for the Ontologic System (OS) and the Ontoscope (Os), because we noticed by the actings of Google that our license model is not structured in the right way to map the products on the fees as we want it and a related thought is to take the classification systems for patents, designs, and trademarks, like the Nice classification, as a starting point and relate fees to the relevant device classes, and
• share for our Ontologic Application (OA) and Ontologic Net (ON), Ontologic Web (OW), and Ontologic uniVerse (OV) Service (OAOOOS or OAO³S) architecture, because we have the feeling somehow that the 5% share is too low and we must come to a higher fair share.

We are very sorry, but that is the capitalism the Silicon Valley teached us.

In general, it can be seen by virtually everybody that our OS with its ON, OW, and OV is the future, because every individual system of large companies are proprietary closed systems that are unable to lift the whole potential of an open system respectively our OS.
In addition, it seems to be useful to repeat the little fact that no other company

Furthermore, we will provide an Ontologic Application (OA) and Ontologic Net (ON), Ontologic Web (OW), and Ontologic uniVerse (OV) Service (OAOOOS or OAO³S) index. Only registered services can participate in the OS.

06.October.2017
Ontonics Further steps
We would like to give some more informations about the Ontologic Net (ON), Ontologic Web (OW), and Ontologic uniVerse (OV) features:

• In the first case mapping services, navigation systems, and Geographic Information Systems (GIS) of the companies Google, Here Technologies, and other companies remain isolated. In this case we will build up our OntoGlobe or OntoEarth of our Ontologic System as another mapping service, but with data democracy.
• In the second case providers of mapping services, navigation systems, and Geographic Information Systems (GIS) provide a part of their basic materials, and static and real-time data for the creation of the federated social mapping service, navigation system, and Ontologic Geographic Information System (OntoGIS) included in our OntoGlobe or OntoEarth of our Ontologic System. In this case we can realize more constructive things instead of creating redundancy.

For enjoying the complete range of (mapping) applications, services, and systems of a specific provider a user might have to change into an appropriated ring or ID space, as it is the case with every other activity and service.

SOPR #25
Our SOPR team has looked once again at the share for the Ontologic Application (OA) and Ontologic Net (ON), Ontologic Web (OW), and Ontologic uniVerse (OV) Service (OAOOOS or OAO³S) architecture.
On the one side we have the social interest, which is sufficiently weighty for an expropriation respectively a compulsory purchase of our Intellectual Properties (IPs).
On the other side such an expropriation requires formal actions by the governments, for example the introduction of a special law, in addition to a reasonable compensation payment for the actual value and the loss of future revenues according to the common valuation or street price.
An alternative is that everybody is allowed to participate for a reasonable compensation, such as a fee or a share.

We already had collected the various pro and contra arguments, which we do not repeat here once again, begun to find a balance between the different interests of all, sketched a resulting license model, and continued with its refinement.
But in the last weeks came once again companies like Volkswagen, Daimler, and Co., Amazon, IBM, Apple, and finally Google. Specifically, the last actings of Google showed the fundamental problem, because

• AI comprise the ontology-based approach and the semantic web, and Artificial Intelligence (AI) and Machine Learning (ML) are included in our SoftBionics (SB), which again are all included in our OSA,
• software already comprised the operating system Android, which reflects our related software part of our Ontologic System Architecture (OSA), OAOOOS Architecture (OAO³SA), and OS OntoLinux, and
• hardware already comprised the smartphone, autonomous cars, and other devices, which reflects our related hardware part of our Ontoscope Architecture (OsA),

and

Ah, what ...? One moment, please! Our OS is neither the operating system Linux nor the programming language Java with its Java Virtual Machine (JVM), and our Ontoscope is not a smartphone, smartwatch, smartglasses, Head-Mounted Display (HMD), car, etc., and taking our works as a blueprint in whole or in part for the combination of prior art does not avoid a causal link (see Judge Birss).

For accelerating the discussion we are taking a short cut to the points about the share and the street price of our works. In this relation, we looked at the

Based on these data we can relatively precisely determine what the street price or share has to be. But we also have introduced a fixed fee for access places and access devices in our OS and started with the balancing of both parts.

The retroactive billing will start with the 1st of January 2015.

The central respectively Managed Peer-to-Peer (MP2P) services, such as the

could be provided either by

This suggest that we should incorporate our management structure of our ON, OW, and OV with its rings and assigned ID spaces into the license model.

Telecommunication services are also OAOOOS. In this way we do not need to differentiate between a server for the infrastructure and a server for a service.
The basis of measurement for the share for a web service or e-commerce service is the overall revenue (e.g. 80:15:5 or 85:10:5).
At least 50 or 100 licensees with the highest amounts of royalties automatically become members of the Inner Circle for one year. The amounts of royalties will be held confidential. The Inner Circle is an expert group or committee that undertakes various tasks, such as

The maximal fixed fees for the Ontologic System (OS) and the Ontoscope (Os) will be increased from 15 to 25 U.S. Dollar to reflect future developments that have not been considered in the first sketch of the license model. Nevertheless, this does not affect the actual devices (e.g. smartphone and automobile) in any way.
The fixed fees will be adjusted in accordance with the key interest rate of the Federal Reserve System and the inflation rate.

iRaiment Further steps
We continued the work on one of our new smart wear models (see also the Further steps of the 13th of May 2017).

07.October.2017
Ontonics Further steps
For our more technique interested fans and readers we would like to give the reminder that we have the 3rd and 4th rings and assigned ID spaces of the management structure of our Ontologic Net (ON), Ontologic Web (OW), and Ontologic uniVerse (OV) conceptually sketched in the Ontonics Further steps of the 10th of July 2017.
It should be very easy to understand where the protection of the kids is happening without limiting them to connect with the rest of the World Wide Web (WWW) if they are allowed and want to.

For everybody, who has not seen it directly, the IDentity and Access Management System (IDAMS) part of our Managed Peer-to-Peer (MP2P) computing system is basically a verified state machine based on our capability-based OntoCore software component of our OSs OntoLix and OntoLinux (see also the section Contract-Based Channel (CBC) of the OntoCore webpage).

For sure, we are also thinking about the question how for example open source projects could and should be handled in the OS, whereby we are tending to a provision that a registered society, registered charity, registered association, non-profit association, or charitable association can ask for a release of the fees and share.
In this relation, we would also like to direct the interest on the 3rd and 4th rings and assigned ID spaces once again and mention the potential introduction of a special ring or ID space for more liberal persons, so to say, if the other measures do not work as expected.
What we do not want to see is that such a provision is exploited as a loophole for any other entity (e.g. universities, research institutes, cities, companies) or as a possibility to undermine the goals and disturb the operations of the OS in any way, specifically not in the ways we have observed with some open source projects.
Furthermore, we will not make any far left-wing politics here, because socialism neither worked nor protected the weaker members of the society like other forms of social systems also failed to do so.

SOPR #26
If a translation of languages is carried out on/by a smartphone and not on/by a connected earphones, then the smartphone has a Multilingual Multimodal Multimedia User Interface (M³UI), which again is an essential feature of our Ontologic System (OS) and our Ontoscope (Os) operated by our OS.

In general, the situation does not change by

In addition, such a separation also provides a causal link, because

A camera with functionality of the field of SoftBionics (SB) (Artificial Intelligence (AI), Machine Learning (ML), Evolutionary Computing (EC), etc.) is a copyright infringement if a causal link has not been avoided, because in this case it would be a part of an Os. For sure, showing the evidence for a causal link is not easy, but we get the causal link in the moment the

08.October.2017
Website update
in accordance with the OntoLix and OntoLinux Website update of today we updated the related content on this website of OntomaX as well, that are the:

OntoLix and OntoLinux Website update
We substituted the name of the section Multimodal Computing of the webpage Links to Software with the term Multiparadigmatic Computing.

09.October.2017
Clarification
In the last days, we concluded that the designation our Ontologic System and Ontoscope as multimedia works of art is not quite right, because the Ontologic System is a totally new type or class of artistic work or work of art, that does not fit into the field or class of multimedia systems. Correspondingly, the Ontoscope is more an Ontologic System respectively a part of an Ontologic System than a multimedia system.
For this reason we have already begun to call it work of art and to consider the more correct designation, such as for example a new art movement, art form, or artistic direction.

SOPR #27
We noticed that more advanced smart speakers also comprise our Ontologic System feature Space-Based Reconfiguration (SBR) (see the Feature-List #6 on the website of OntoLinux), specifically the smart speakers Homepod of the company Apple and Home Max of the company Google, as well as related smart speakers of other companies. Therefore, the license fee for the software and hardware is in the range of 5 + 5 to 10 +10 U.S. Dollar depending on additional properties when a causal link can be proven, which is the case if the operating systems of these companies are used to operate the smart speakers.

On the one hand, the company Robert Bosch is playing a questionable game with its strategy to give away our Intellectual Properties (IPs) as open or/and free hardware and software, because we have already proven that the Industry 4.0 approach with the

is based on our Ontologic System Architecture (OSA; see the Basic Properties and the sections Automation, Machine Simulation, and Robot Simulation of the webpage Links to Software) and our Caliber/Calibre, and infringes our copyright and other rights already (e.g. cyber-physical respectively reflection in combination with semantic, ontology-based approaches and systems, immobile agent-based systems or even immobile robots (immobots) and mobile robots), or sooner or later (see Judge Birss).
On the other hand, we have here an interesting example for our license model, because one of its plants has 2,000 devices, or being more precise, production machines with one or more embedded systems that are contected by so-called IoT Gateways or some kind of agents or immobots.
Though if our license model is accepted, then we have no problems with such a strategy.

Oh, the question arose once again if a product with a digital twin or virtual duplicate constitutes some kind of an agent or actor, or simply said an Ontologic Application (OA) and Ontologic Net (ON), Ontologic Web (OW), and Ontologic uniVerse (OV) Service (OAOOOS or OAO³S). The latter view would make the billing relatively easy: 5% of the overall revenue.

10.October.2017
SOPR #28
We got a new licensee with the company Sephora with its online-offline experience based on our Ontologic System Architecture (OSA) comprising the personalised recommender system and the virtual reality available online and on the app, and we are sure that Alibaba will follow next, though we guess that both have not understood the legal situation completely.

We are also looking at the other new offline shops that are based on a thorough integration of online concepts as part of an online-offline experience in accordance with our Ontologic System Architecture (OSA), Ontologic Application (OA) and Ontologic Net (ON), Ontologic Web (OW), and Ontologic uniVerse (OV) Service Architecture (OAOOOSA or OAO³SA), and Ontoscope Architecture (OsA).

In relation with the user identity, the connected cars and trucks, and the Industry 4.0 approach on the other side we saw that various groups of companies have introduced their own

For sure, these are interesting developments providing the public alternative choices.
But as in the case with the smart speakers and home hubs, these apps are running on the operating systems of the companies Apple, Google, and Microsoft and due to the proven causal links they are running in our Ontologic System eventually when linking or using related functionalities of these operating systems.
Or said in other words, there might be some very special configurations in which an app is outside of the scope of our Ontologic System but we do not think that in the next future exceptions or loopholes still remain to exist.

The same holds for products and services of the Mozilla Foundation by the way and as far as we can see the Mozilla Foundation does not qualify for the release of our fee.

We welcome everybody in our new world for a fee and a share.

11.October.2017
Clarifiction
After a first large country and some high-profile personalities of the financial sector, security sector, and information security sector took the position against the blockchain technique, another large country also blocked related websites.
Luckily, our Ontologic System (OS) also includes the other alternative that is our Trusted Computing Base (TCB) comprising our OntoCore software component of the OS OntoLinux including various original and unique features (see the OntoLix and OntoLinux Further steps of the 5th of July 2017 and for example the Investigations::Multimedia, AI and KM of the 28th of August 2017 and the Investigations::Multimedia of the 3rd of September 2017).

In this relation it has to be noted once again, that our Trusted Computing Base (TCB) is an essential part of our Ontologic System (OS), as can be easily seen with the basic properties of our OS and the technologies mentioned and referenced in the section Paving the Way by Bridging the Gap of the webpage Caliber/Calibre of the website of OntoLinux, and is not the result of an ordinary technological progress in the field of operating system and network or distributed computing.

12.October.2017
Clarification
Based on the description and definition of the Cyber-Physical Systems of the first generation (CPS 1.0), we concluded:
The Cyber-Physical Systems of the second generation (CPS 2.0), comprising for example the Industry 4.0, are a part of our Ontologic System (OS).

This finding or assessment is also a part of the legal foundation for our licensing. See also the Investigations::Multimedia, AI and KM of today.

Style of Speed Further steps
We have developed a new Active Component.

Investigations::Multimedia, AI and KM

We also quote from the webpage of the Cyber-Physical Systems Summit, which seems to be publicated in the year 2008 or late in the year 2007:
"NSF has announced a major new research program on Cyber-Physical Systems.
[...]
Cyber-Physical Systems
As computers become ever-faster and communication bandwidth ever-cheaper, computing and communication capabilities will be embedded in all types of objects and structures in the physical environment. Applications with enormous societal impact and economic benefit will be created by harnessing these capabilities in time and across space. Such systems that bridge the cyber-world of computing and communications with the physical world are called cyber-physical systems. Cyber-physical systems (CPS) are physical and engineered systems whose operations are monitored, coordinated, controlled and integrated by a computing and communication core. This intimate coupling between the cyber and physical will be manifested from the nano-world to large-scale wide-area systems of systems. And at multiple time-scales.
Cyber-physical systems will transform how we interact with the physical world just like the Internet transformed how we interact with one another.".

Comment
This provides us

• summary of the field of Cyber-Physical Systems of the first generation (CPS 1.0), which is more or less the field of Internet of Things of the first generation (IoT 1.0), and
• delimitation between the field of CPS 1.0 and our Ontologic System, including the fields of Cyber-Physical Systems of the second generation (CPS 2.0) and Internet of Things of the second generation (IoT 2.0), as well as the field of Industry of the fourth generation (Industry 4.0),

• followed our activities,
• needed more than 1 year alone to get the basic research started, which again we did before since around the year 1998 (see also The Proposal and the section History of the webpage Overview of the website of OntoLinux),
• mentioned the related parts of our Ontologic System, such as the Caliber/Calibre, and declared them as the core of the CPS 1.0,
• took our publications as blueprint, specifically the website of OntoLinux, as can be seen with the terms nano, bridge and
• began to use the term bionics as well, that was not common at that time in favour of the term biomimetics, after we registered the domain SoftBionics (SB), though the NSF only used the term bionics in a puzzling relation with a very specific utilization in health care and therefore at least not in the sense of SB, which was also done in virtually the same way puzzling way by a company some years later for a basic software library of an operating system base on the Linux kernel.

The semantic web is related with SOA, but the semantic grid and cognitive grid are not mentioned, as it is the case with the field of Mediated Reality (MedR) and other basic properties and components of our Ontologic System (OS), which were added by the company with the Industry 4.0 approach at the same time as well. As we said, we have here either island systems or plagiarisms of our OS. We also observed that all those missing properties and components of our OS discussed here are discussed in the future form.
See the Clarification Industry 4.0 Special #1 of the 22nd of February 2017 and the Clarification Industry 4.0 Special #2 of the 24th of February 2017, the discussion of the suspicious document about the cognitive grid in the Website review of the 23rd of August 2017, and the Clarification and the Investigations::Multimedia, AI and KM of the 22nd, 23rd, 24th, and 28th of August 2017, and also keep in mind that we discussed our Evolutionary operating system (Evoos) already in the December of 1999 at the University of Dortmund, B.R.D..
Sadly to say, in this way no gatecrash and partycrash is possible.

13.October.2017
Comment of the Day
We're flyin' it™

Original vs. Inspiration
1. row: Tham Hoi Mun, Orange Bike
2. row: David Stammel, Destiny Ultra Sparrow
3. row: Isaac Hannaford and Travis Brady, Shrike
4. row: Yusuke Mori, Hover Racer
5. row: Ivan Tantsiura, Ridon
6. row: Ivan Tantsiura, Ridon

© Tham Hoi Mun, David Stammel, Isaac Hannaford and Travis Brady, Yusuke Mori, and Ivan Tantsiura

Visit the websites of the designers, but take some time again.

Because the media refuse to inform the public appropriately, we would like to show some more hoverbike designs that are sources of inspiration for the range of Swoops and Speeder Bikes of Style of Speed (see also Style of Speed Further steps of the 13th of May 2017, 6th of June 2017, and 10th of September 2017).

I'm flyin' it™

SOPR #29
Our Society for Ontological Performance and Reproduction rights (hereafter SOPR) is approaching several decisions:

• occupational groups or professional groups, also called curiae, and
• kinds of membership.

Every interested entity can become a member of SOPR. Basically, four kinds of membership exist:

• affiliated,
• extraordinary, and
• full, as well as
• board called the Inner Circle

membership.

• include the demands of the other members and the broad public, and
• does not disturb the goals of the SOPR.

• a fixed fee for every single reproduction of the Ontologic System in the range of 0.[00]1 to 25 U.S. Dollar,
• a fixed fee for every single reproduction of the Ontoscope respectively an access device or an access point, but not for an embedded system connected with an access device or an access point through a computer network in the range of 0.1 to 25 U.S. Dollar, and
• a share of 5% of the total revenue made with an Ontologic Application (OA) and Ontologic Net (ON), Ontologic Web (OW), and Ontologic uniVerse (OV) Service, and
• no fee or share in a case that an endeavour (e.g. non-profit society) should be supported to support the goals of the members of the Inner Circle and the SOPR, and in consultation and agreement with the members of the Inner Circle.

• licensing and collecting process is streamlined,
• user data is kept in the individual systems of the members, and
• related costs are avoided.

• infrastructure,
• Superstructure,
• Weather Control (WC) and climate control,
• space access,
• ocean cleanup,
• atmosphere cleanup,
• orbit cleanup,
• potable water supply,
• energy supply,
• health care and medicine supply,
• insect regeneration, and
• many other activities,

that all the other federal, public, and private entities failed to realize in the last decades despite of democratic structures and better knowledge in each and every aspect, or simply said, to save your butts.

This Articles of Association (AoA) and the Terms of Service (ToS) will be completed with what has been said in the past already and what is missing.

OntoLix and OntoLinux Further steps
We made some detail works in relation with the abstract machine comprising the Virtual Machines (VMs) and the Virtual Virtual Machine (VVM) of our OntoCore and OntoBot software components, and also our OntoNet, OntoWeb, OntoVerse, OntoGlobe, and OntoEarth software components on the one side and the Peer-to-Peer (P2P) Virtual Machine (VM) Askemos on the other side.

• "One important aspect of the Askemos machine is a global rights, roles, and personal identity management system. [...] Capability based schemes have been proposed to reduce the dangers inherent to environments finally controlled by a superuser. [...] In a capability system the authority of a program is just the capabilities it holds. A capability is usually an opaque bit pattern, which, when owned by an object, enables that object to invoke other objects, which in turn decide by themselfs whether they execute the requested operation. [...] Processes must be confined to a strict protocol when manipulating capabilities. Known capability-based systems use a special trusted instance [...] An open, distributed system lacks such a special status. In this section a rule set is derived which defines the capability manipulation rules for the Askemos system. This protection scheme is an extension of capability systems. Instead of the usual opaque bit pattern, a rule is given, how to create new capabilities and grant those to, and revoked them from, other users. Furthermore, these capabilities are not constrained to invoke methods of certain objects, instead they can be used to protect any kind of method in any object. One consequence is that, while usually capabilities are also used to locate the receiver of messages, such an implicit knowledge is not encoded here. To distinguish this kind of extended capability from an opaque, unstructured value, we call such structured capability a "right"." and
• "[... S]ome effort was made to establish global user identity and data repositories. Those appears to be a premise for electronic trade systems and would ease many applicative tasks. [...] it appears that they face heavy resistance from potential customers and users up to a degree that those projects are put to a rest. Said resistance apparently stems from the human interest in privacy. The account aggregation those proposed schemes incur do not only drive paranoid security experts away, but are also felt by the casual users. Askemos, being distributed without super user authority, can achieve the same utility regarding trade while preserving safety, security and privacy. It just has to be completed with a decent contract system, to assure quality of service. The users are than free to choose whom they trust with their information.",

is also provided with our Ontologic System Architecture (OSA), specifically with the OntoCore and OntoBot software components based on SoftBionics (SB), and the IDentity and Access Management System (IDAMS) part of the Managed Peer-to-Peer (MP2P) computing system (see the Ontonics Further steps of the 7th of October 2017).

• our namespaces of OntoNet and OntoWeb (see also the Further steps of the 4th of October 2017), and
• even one of the location addressing schemes of our OntoGlobe and OntoEarth (see the Further steps 23rd of September 2017).

In this context, we would also like to note that our

by design (see the section Integrating Architecture of the webpage Overview), so that our OS is also able to provide the Ricardian contract design pattern and technique (e.g. a HyperText Markup Language (HTML) or eXtensible Markup Language (XML) document with rule-based legal matter embedded as executable code) specialized to fungible (financial) instruments.
The latter has to be viewed in relation with the many other properties of our OS as well.

At this point it can be easily seen once again that

• functionality,
• safety,
• security,
• privacy,
• liability,
• integrity,
• flexibility, and hence
• synergy

in relation to every aspect even in relation to the smart contract transaction protocol than any other architecture or platform, such as for example blockchain-based systems with VMs or Turing complete platforms included in our OS and the Peer-to-Peer (P2P) Virtual Machines (VMs), like for example Askemos based on our Evolutionary operating system (Evoos) and hence also inlcuded in our OS,

or said in other words, all these platforms and systems based on the techniques of the smart contract transaction protocol and the blockchain technique, and used for establishing so-called distributed ledgers, Decentralized Autonomous Organizations (DAOs), and such alike,

which implies several foundational legal and technical problems.

By the way, Askemos is structured in the following ways:

It's not a trick - It's Ontologics

14.October.2017
Original vs. Inspiration
1. row: National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA), Dual Keel Space Station, Lunar/Mars Transportation Node (1986)
2. row: National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) and McDonnell-Douglas, [Dual Keel] Space Station Concept (1986)
3. row: National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA), Roof Space Station Concept (1984)
4. row:National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA), Space Structure (1989)
5. row: Rick Michael Sternbach, Space Doctor
6. row:Unknown, Space Structure
7. row: Boeing, Space Structure
8. row: Pat Rawlings, Transportation Node
9. row: Pat Rawlings, Orbital Encounter
10. row: David A. Hardy, International Space Station Space Hotel
11. row: Wernher von Braun and Walt Disney, Man and the Moon Space Station S1, box art (1955)
12. row: Chesley Bornstell, Wernher von Braun Space Station Wheel (1952)
13. row: Stanley Kubrick, 2001: A Space Odyssey Space Station (1968)

© National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA), :(, Rick Michael Sternbach, :(, Boeing, Pat Rowlings, David A. Hardy, :(, Chesley Bornstell, and Metro-Goldwyn-Mayer Studios Incorporated

Somehow we like this grid structures, but what we want to see are

• creates artificial gravity,
• has a large non-rotating section as hub,
• has at least one non-rotating spaceship port or shelter, and
• is attached to other space structures, such as for example a non-rotating grid structure.

See also the Pictures of the Day of the 14th of June 2008 and the Ontonics Further steps of the 8th of November 2011.

Ontonics Superstructure #17
The advantage of our Cyber-Physical Systems (CPS) for Air Traffic Management (ATM) with Future Air Traffic Management Concepts Evaluation Tool (FACET) and National Airspace System Constraint Evaluation and Notification Tool (NASCENT) is their direct connection, inclusion, and integration with all the other original and unique properties of our Ontologic System (OS), so that they can also be used with our

• Artificial Intelligence (AI),
• Machine Learning (ML),
• Swarm Intelligence (SI),
• Natural Multimodal Processing (NMP),
• Common Sense Computing (CSC),
• Cognitive Multi-Agent System (CMAS),
• Evolutionary Computing (EC),
• etc.,

• 3 or more dimensions and
• Mediated Reality Environments (MedREs),

as Cyber-Physical Systems of the second generation (CPS 2.0).
See also the issue #5 of the 19th of January 2017, #6 of the 5th of March 2017, #14 of the 7th of August 2017, and #16 of the 15th of August 2017.

Style of Speed Further steps
We worked on the first model of our Hoverpod and Hoverbus range mentioned in the Further steps of the 2nd of September 2017.

The images below show a Hoverdrone of a video game that has interesting thrust units or Hover Power Units (HPUs), as could be seen with our Hoverdrone respectively Quadrovector or Quadvector design shown in the Roboticle Further steps of the 17th of August 2017 and some of the designs shown in the Original vs. Inspiration of the 13.October.2017 (yesterday) as well.

© Konami

But somehow we got the impression that this direction of development does not really make sense and instead it would be more advantageous to continue with the development of our hoverwing mentioned in the Further steps of the 25th of May 2017 and (see also the related Further steps of the 20th of March 2017 and 11th of May 2017, and the Original vs. Inspiration 10th of September 2017).

15.October.2017
Clarification
We would like to direct the interest to the chapter 6 Ausblick==Outlook of The Proposal, specifically to the line "Der Begriff Hardware bezieht sich in diesem Zusammenhang nicht nur auf die in heutigen Computer-Systemen verbaute Hardware, sondern auch auf zukünftige Computer-Systeme mit quanten-, photonen- oder molekülbasierten CPUs.==In this conjunction, the term hardware is not only related to the hardware built into the contemporary computer systems, but also on future computer systems with quantum-, photon-, or molecule-based CPUs." and the webpages Terms of the 21st Century and Feature-Lists.

Ontonics Further steps
We have confirmed the mass production process for one of our technologies.

We have also confirmed the performance of one of our technologies.

Furthermore, we have developed a new variant of a special display device.

Moreover, we have developed a new variant of a special component for mobile devices.

OntoLix and OntoLinux Further steps
We added to the section Intelligent/Cognitive Agent of the webpage Links to Software the link:

In this way we

Keep in mind that

• immobots, robots,
• CPS and Internet of Things (IoT), and
• SoftBionics (SB),

are connected with each other and with humans for interacting with them, or said in other words, C.S. was already there, and

• metaphysical, cybernetical, and physical levels respectively real and virtual levels, and
• implementation (e.g. processor and software code) and design (e.g. hardware and software models) levels.

of a system besides the many other integrated properties. Indeed, when reading prior art one might think in the first moment that there is no difference between said prior art and our Ontologic System and our Ontoscope, but with every further view more and more differences, details, and sophisticated properties can be recognized.

Ontologic Web Further steps
We added our new SoftBionics (SB) platform to our Ontologic Web (OW). The SB platform

• Artificial Intelligence (AI),
• Machine Learning (ML),
• Computer Vision (CV),
• Natural Multimodal Processing (NMP),
  • Natural Language Processing (NLP),
  • Natural Image Processing (NIP),
  • and so on,
• Common Sense Computing (CSC),
• Affective Computing (AffC) and Emotive Computing (EmoC),
• Cognitive Multi-Agent System (CMAS),
• Swarm Intelligence (SI) or Swarm Computing (SC),
• Evolutionary Computing (EC or EvoC),
• etc.,

• create dataset generators,
• generate massive datasets, and
• train deep learning models, and also
• trade datasets and models in the platform marketplace,

and

The SB platform takes advantage of our original and unique

• our operating system (kernel) OntoCore or
• an operating system based on the OntoL4 microkernel

of our Ontologic System (see also the Further steps of the 5th of July 2017, the Clarifiction of the 11th of October 2017, and the OntoLix and OntoLinux Further steps of the and 13th of October 2017) for executing all transactions in the SB platform, and

The enormous computing capacity that will become available on our SB platform is another game-changer for the wide adoption of the fields of AI, ML, EvoC, CSC, EmoC, CV, CMAS, and others with the support of our ontology-based or ontology-driven, Ontology-Oriented (OO 2), and Ontologic(-Oriented) (OO 3) systems, including for example the semantic web, semantic grid, and cognitive grid.

Btw: The terms ubiquitous computing, pervasive computing, immobile robot (immobot), Evernet, Everweb, Web of Everything, Web of Objects, Internet of Things (IoT), and Cyber-Physical Systems (CPS), are often used to refer to the amalgamation of computation and physical properties or simply said to our Ontologic System (OS).

Style of Speed Further steps
We are thinking that it would be advantageous to increase the transport capacity of our Space Launch System (SLS) and Space Transportation System (STS) with Single-Stage-To-Orbit (SSTO) Reusable Launch Vehicle (RLV) and Orbital SpacePlane (OSP) Space Shuttle III/BigStar by a factor of 2 or up to 12.7 m/500 in in diameter, and by a factor of 4 or up to 3,100 m³/189,173,656 in³ in volume, so that we are able to transport larger objects into orbit.
The true problem is that our space station needs a larger spaceship port or shelter. :D

One design that may fulfill our requirements is the OKB-1 MTKVA launch vehicle design shown in the images below, which must be developed around the year 1974.
For sure, we replaced the rocket engine and all other outdated technologies. The large nozzle and the two small nozzles are removed for the trunk lid and three linear-aerospike-engines that frame the trunk lid.

© :(

In this relation, a business partner suggested to provide our hoverwing and Thermal Protection System (TPS) technologies (see also the Further steps of the 1st of October 2017) for its Two-Stage-To-Orbit (TSTO) RLV and OSP, that it is developing together with another important entity.
Indeed, this suggestion is interesting despite that such a TSTO RLV OSP would make our X-3*/LittleStar obsolete somehow.

In addition, we continued with the extension of our outer space infrastructure. (Should this become a new project called for example Ontonics Outer Space Structure?)

16.October.2017
Website update
We added to the Clarification of the 12th of October 2017 a graphic of the so-called 5C architecture for designing Cyber-Physical Systems (CPS) in manufacturing. The difference between the CPS of the first generation (CPS 1.0) and our Ontologic System (OS) shows nicely what has been taken from our OS and added to the CPS 1.0, like for example

as others did with for example

or with the so-called 6C system, comprising

resulting in the CPS of the second generation (CPS 2.0).

Clarification
Maybe it has not been understood, but even if blockchain-based systems are able to safely and securely process some thousands transactions per second, they remain the new single points of failure and every time a failure has happened or a new rule has to be introduced a hard fork is required.
Imagine in this context the situation that for every application a blockchain has to be managed over a longer periode of time or the attempt to guarantee some kind of a backward compatibility to a specific blockchain.
This might work for some years, but a look on the evolution paths of systems, such as for example operating systems and programming languages, shows that many developments end in a dead end and only some few systems remain relevant for the broad public, and in the end in such few systems blockchain-based systems will be used for some very few special tasks. The latter is also the reason why we offer the blockchain technique in addition to our Trusted Computing Base (TCB) besides the (smart) contract techniques.
Furthermore, such a dependency on such a broad scale is not required for providing trust in a worldwide system. In fact, the basic properties of our Ontologic System Architecture (OSA) property "of (mostly) being bureaucracy-free, well-structured and -formed, validated and verified, and specification- and proof-carrying" address that overhead of blockchain management respectively avoid a situation in which the OS is spending enormous resources for only proving its trustworthiness.

Honestly, we have no clue how this should work (in an efficient way) with billions of networked embedded systems even if our Ontologic System (OS) would be

To avoid any misconceptions, for us it is not important what type of consensus infrastructure is used, but it is relevant when our Ontologic System (OS), Ontoscope (Os), Ontologic Net (ON), Ontologic Web (OW), Ontologic uniVerse (OV), and Ontologic Applications (OA) and ON, OW, and OV Services (OAOOOS or OAO³S) are used and the whole potentials of our OS, Os, and so on are blocked, literally said.
In this respect, we have to point once again to

• "[...] we also have a verified and proof-carrying system as one of the foundations of our Ontologic System and hence a verified blockchain included by its design", whereby we mentioned our Ontologic data storage Base (OntoBase) and Ontologic File System (OntoFS) software components, and
• "a smart contract constitutes an Ontologic Application if it is verified or/and executable in a runtime environment that also has one or more features of our OS", whereby such a runtime environment could be our OntoCore and OntoBot software components,

• of the "user account control enhancement" and
• that "every user gets an id",

and also

Last but not least, we are entering the age of quantum computing, which still applies the common technique of cryptography on the one hand and on the other hand makes the blockchain technique obsolete but not our OS and its TCB.

Ontonics Further steps
We have developed a new technology that solves a very important problem. Sadly to say, as in the case with other very important solutions, we can give no specific informations, because everything we have publicated has been stolen so far.

Ontologic Web Further steps
We added new services to our Ontologic Web (OW) that are variants of the services provided by our Search, Find, and Information (SFI) engine Ontologics.info based on the smart contract and blockchain functionalities of our OntoCore and OntoLedger software components (see also the Ontologic Web and Ontologics.info Further steps of the 20th of May 2016, the Ontologic Net Further steps of the 5th of July 2017, and the Ontologic Web Further steps of the 5th and 6th of July 2017 once again). As it is known since more than a decade, our SFI Ontologics.info

• XML vocabulary and languages,
• knowledge bases, and
• ontologies,

and accordingly the general concept behind these new service variants could be designated as the semantic blockchain or ontologic blockchain.

In this relation, we would like to repeat that these service variants are provided to fulfill the potential demand of our customers on the one hand and accordingly have to be understood as an extension of our other services executed on our Trusted Computing Base (TCB) that we still highly recommend as first choice.

17.October.2017
Comment of the Day
"Just another Ontoscope."
See also the Comment of the Day of the 13th of September 2017 and #2 of the 5th of October 2017.

And no, an Ontoscope is not the result of an ordinary technological progress but an original and unique, characteristic, unforeseeable and unexpected ontologic, cybernetic, and multimedia work of art created by C.S. for

• Hardware Engineering (HE),
• Sofware Engineering (SE),
• cybernetics,
• SoftBionics (SB)
  • Artificial Intelligence (AI),
  • Machine Learning (ML),
  • Swarm Intelligence (SI),
  • Computer Vision (CV),
  • Natural Multimodal Processing (NMP),
    • Natural Language Processing (NLP),
    • Natural Image Processing (NIP),
  • Common Sense Computing (CSC),
  • Affective Computing (AffC) and Emotive Computing (EmoC),
  • Cognitive Multi-Agent System (CMAS),
  • Evolutionary Computing (EC or EvoC),
  • etc.,
• photography,
• videography,
• cinematography, and
• Mediated Reality (MedR)
  • Augmented Reality (AR),
  • Virtual Reality (VR), and
  • Mixed Reality (MR),

and

• for the personal capabilities on the one hand and
• of the fact that the industries and eventually the whole world is doing what C.S. does and following us since decades on the other hand.

Clarification
We looked at a project of a so-called distributed ledger, that provides a software architecture comprising business blockchain components and is preferred by a larger group of entities. Such a distributed ledger architecture based on the techniques of the smart contract protocol and the blockchain also constitutes a whole system or envionment that provides a high level of trustworthiness or credibility, which is also exactly one of the conceptual and essential properties of our Ontologic System (OS), as can be seen with the slogan "Stars don't lie" that also constitutes the foundation for Pure Rationality (see also the Investigations::Robotics of the 11th of April 2009, the Clarification of the 16th of April 2016, the reference of the Golden Compass or alethiometer, which is a truth-telling device that has been combined with the Caliber/Calibre by C.S. (see also the Original of the 12th of December 2007), and the Ontologica, Ontologico, Ontologics of the 21st of May 2016). In addition, platforms, stack layers, components, and applications based on this architecture also reflect related parts of our OS.

At first, such similarities seem to be either happenstances or cases of fair use. But the truly important point is that if one has seen our Ontologic System and wants to create an alternative to it, then this causal link voids the argument of fair use (see the Pictures of the Day of the 25th of July 2013 and its comment with the judgement of Judge Birss). What we are trying to find out is where the white, yellow, or red line has to be drawn, and we already do think that said line has to be drawn when the goals or expressions of our OS are reflected and not solely its description.

Or simply said, with the IDentity and Access Management Systems (IDAMSs), and the distributed ledgers, such as Ethereum and Hyperledger projects, the trustworthiness or credibility of us and our OS is mimicked, and with all the

more conceptual and essential properties are copied when viewed as one system or system part.

How an OS or the OS is implemented in detail is not relevant in this respect. But we continue with

18.October.2017
Clarification
We also would like to mention that making a negative form of an original and unique work, for example by encircling it with systems, applications, and services, which do the same as our works or are based on them, constitutes an infringement of the copyright and other rights as well.

OntoLix and OntoLinux Further steps
We tend to adhere to our initial Ontologic System (OS) and Ontologic System Architecture (OSA) with the

and combine them with the OntoLedger software component, that provides the specific functionalities of the blockchain-based systems (see once again the Ontologic Web and Ontologics.info Further steps of the 20th of May 2016, the Clarification #2 of the 15th of December 2016, the Ontologic Net Further steps of the 5th of July 2017, the Ontologic Web Further steps of the 5th and 6th of July 2017, and the 16th of October 2017).

The reason for our preferance is that we have an Ontologic System Architecture (OSA) that integrates all in one, and the names for the functions, components, and subsystems are merely for having identifiers to talk about them and to understand a related part of the OS when a discussion focus on said specific part. The components can also be understood as namespaces or sets, and the whole OS can be viewed as a cloud or fog with the functionalities being the water droplets or molecules, or as an artificial brain.

For example, we have

• operating system (os or OpS), specifically
  • reflective,
  • capability-based,
  • (smart) contract-based,
  • etc.,
  and
• SoftBionics (SB), specifically
  • Artificial Intelligence (AI),

and

that are utilized by utilizing the other functionalities of the OS.
Continuing with this relatively simple example in relation with blockchain-based systems, the functionalities of the (holistic) OntoCore and the (holistic) OntoBot can generate at run-time

• manage the os functionalities of the OntoCore, and
• communicate and collaborate respectively find a consensus about what has to be done by utilizing the functionalities of the OntoBase,

so that in the end only a specific strategy or business logic is missing, such as some more different ways of finding consensus that are not already available in the Operating System (OpS or os), DataBase Management System (DBMS), File System (FS), and Multi-Agent System (MAS) functions, components, and subsystems, but not their foundational implementation. Such a missing strategy, business logic, smart contract, or Ontologic Application is provided by the OntoLedger and executed on the OntoCore or the OntoBot. See once again the links given above.
This synergy cannot be generated by a blockchain-based system as long as it does not become an OS in whole or in part.

For example, the Ethereum platform is only a plagiarism of the related part of our OS more or less, and the Hyperledger project merely takes the functionality of an OpS, an FS, and a DBMS to define a specific Peer-to-Peer (P2P) computing platform, which by the way reminds us of our Managed Peer-to-Peer (MP2P) that runs on our OS respectively in our OS, and therefore adding for example a lottery algorithm to find consensus is a much too thin argument and a much too short lever for us to change anything related with our OSA. In additon, we are (very) sure that similar techniques of finding a consensus are also included in one of the many systems in the field of agent-based system and MAS, though they might have a different name or a different description of the same functionality.

Somehow we have gotten the impression that even the experts still do not understand what our OS truly is, can do, and how advanced it is.

Style of Speed Further steps
We got the confirmation by an external entity that one of our systems works as intended and concluded that it can be utilized as a sonic boom suppressor as well (see also the Further steps of the 27th of January 2016 and 26th of March 2017).

19.October.2017
SOPR #30
One specific point that we are looking at is the practice of performing our IPs for free by potential licensees because no revenue is generated in this way, obviously. Or said in other words, we are not interested in supporting business strategies that are based on growth and not on profit.

20.October.2017
Comment of the Day
Ontohome™

Ontonics Further steps
For all entities, who have not seen it directly,

remain in the 5th ring and assigned ID spaces of the management structure of our Ontologic Net (ON), Ontologic Web (OW), and Ontologic uniVerse (OV) conceptually sketched in the Ontonics Further steps of the 10th of July 2017.
The OntoLedger software component of our Ontologic System (OS) already has a part that is compatible with the Hyperledger project for blockchains and distributed ledgers. In this way, every entity can seamlessly change to the fields of Cyber-Physical Systems of the second generation (CPS 2.0), Internet of Things of the second generation (IoT 2.0), and Networked Embedded System of the second generation (NES 2.0) by using the OntoLedger together with the Ontologic Net of Things (ONoT) included in our ON and including the fields of CPS, IoT, and NES (see the Ontologic Net Further steps of the 5th of January 2017).
For sure, in both cases the related legal and technical provisions are mandatory.

Please keep in mind that a blockchain platform constitutes an illegal plagiarism of our OS when a causal link can be proven by showing that it

Our Society for Ontological Performance and Reproduction (SOPR) team has already safed the evidences in the cases of two prominent blockchain platforms.

In addition, besides all their intrinsic technical deficits by their foundational concept and design (see for example the Clarification of the 16th of October 2017 and also the related Clarification of the 15th of October 2017) those platforms based on the blockchain and smart contract techniques, and featuring Turing complete platforms or Virtual Machines (VMs) have solely perverted the (not really existing) software stack of an operating system (os) or our OS, so to say, and in this way lost most of the superior properties of our OS (see also the Clarification of the 11th of October 2017 and the OntoLix and OntoLinux Further steps 18th of October 2017). For

they have to copy more OS properties or/and pervert the software stack once again, eventually, which result in our Ontologic System Architecture (OSA), obviously, as can be seen with e.g.

Last but not least, we highly recommend once again to

SOPR #31
We added to the Articles of Association (AoA) and the Terms of Service (ToS) of our Society for Ontological Performance and Reproduction (SOPR) the following rule:

The foundational rules for the beginning and ending of the membership in the SOPR and the protocol about the way rules of the AoA and the ToS can be changed have been determined in the other related rules already.

In addition, all messages related with our SOPR will be taken as the foundation for the creation of related webpages that will be publicated on the website of Ontonics.

OntoLix and OntoLinux Further steps
We are working on the webpage for our OntoLedger component that is based on all the informations that we have given or will give in relation with blockchain-based systems.

Ontologic Net Further steps
We think it is time to end the mess and the many failed attempts of companies to push their proprietary Internet of Things (IoT) standards into the market, that we have seen in this field in the last 2 decades.
Accordingly, we are short before the presentation of our OntoHome system as part of our Ontologic Net of Things (ONoT) (see the Further steps of the 5th of January 2017), which provides standards and interfaces, such as

provided by our Search, Find, and Information (SFI) engine Ontologics.info, as well as services for the so-called smart home.
No Samsung, Huawei, LG Electronics, Microsoft, Google, Amazon, or This Then That or whatsoever standards, but simply our Ontologic Net (ON), Ontologic Web (OW), and Ontologic uniVerse (OV) with our OntoBot, OntoScope, OntoNet, OntoWeb, and OntoVerse software components.

Ontologic Web Further steps
*** Work in progress - missing link ***
We would like to give the information that our OntoCoin and OntoTaler of our Ontologic Web (see the Further steps of the 5th of July 2017) have become more than an ordinary cryptocurrency in the sense of a banking system and a stock market or equity market, and were added to the financial service platform of our OW. In this way, users can use our OntoPay service for all their different cryptocurrencies as well.
Oh, we have to apologize for not disclosing it (see the Further steps of the [2016?]).

Investigations::Multimedia
*** Work in progress - better explanation due to latest finding ***

The first quoted paper has the title "Tezos: A Self-Amending Crypto-Ledger [-] Position Paper".
"We aim to remedy the potential for atrophied evolution in the crypto-currency space by presenting Tezos, a generic and self-amending crypto-ledger. [The term self-amending is a synonym for the terms being reflective and being self-adaptive, which are basic properties of our OS, as can be seen on the webpage Overview of the OS OntoLinux. The term evolution references The Proposal, which is about a reflective operating system, or being more precise, a Cognitive Agent-Based Operating System (CABOS).]",
"Tezos can instantiate any blockchain based protocol. Its seed protocol specifies a procedure for stakeholders to approve amendments to the protocol, including amendments to the amendment procedure itself. [Here we have again the reflective property of our OS and the term seed references again The Proposal in relation with the field of developmental biologiy.]",
"The philosophy of Tezos is inspired by Peter Suber's Nomic, a game built around a fully introspective set of rules. ["Nomic is a game in which changing the rules is a move. In that respect it differs from almost every other game. The primary activity of Nomic is proposing changes in the rules, debating the wisdom of changing them in that way, voting on the changes, deciding what can and cannot be done afterwards, and doing it. Even this core of the game, of course, can be changed.", [Peter Suber, The Paradox of Self-Amendment]. With Nomic we have a reference to the field of philosophy as well. Furthermore, this game or system property is not called (fully) introspective but reflective, which leads us once again to our OS.]",
"The "hard fork" problem, or the inability for [the cryptocurrency] Bitcoin to dynamically innovate due to coordination issues. [As we discussed in for example the Clarification of the 16th of October 2017, our OS with its Ontologic System Architecture (OSA) addressed this problem just right from its start more than a decade ago.]",
"The limited expressiveness of Bitcoin's transaction language, which has pushed smart contracts onto other chains. [Besides we got the term onto, we have here another problem with the limited expressiveness of blockchain-based systems, that is also directly solved by the foundational concept and design of our OS.]",
"Similarly, [the blockchain(-based distributed computing) platform] Ethereum has designed stateful contracts and a Turing-complete transaction language. More important contributions include privacy-preserving ring signatures (CryptoNote) and untraceable transactions using SNARK (Zerocash). [If we here terms like ring and zero in the context of our OS, then the alarm bells are ringing somehow. The Turing machine model of computation, that defines an abstract machine, is directly connected with A Prototype, specifically with the chapter 3 Kolmogorov-Komplexität und algorithmische Informationstheorie==Kolmogorov Complexity and Algorithmic Information Theory (AIT), as well as the field of operating systems, and for sure with our OntoCore and OntoBot software components. We also discussed such blockchain platforms with a Turing complete Virtual Machine (VM), which can perform any classical (non-quantum) computation, in for example the OntoLix and OntoLinux Further steps of the 13th of October 2017, the Clarification of the 16th of October 2017, and the Ontonics Further steps of today. In this respect, it is important to note the fact, that our Ontologic System Architecture (OSA) provides the functionalities of all these techniques (e.g. smart contract protocol and blockchain) and applications, platforms, and systems (e.g. Turing complete VM with transaction and cryptocurrency) since its start (see the OntoLix and OntoLinux Further steps of the 5th of July 2017 for example).]",
"Crypto-currencies suffer from the same fate as smartphones which are incompatible with one another; they derive their value from a network effect, or the number of users who have given it value. To this end, any innovation that occurs outside of a crypto-currency will either fail to build enough network effect to be noticed, or it will succeed but undermine the value of the savings in the old currency. If smartphones were incompatible with older models, there would be either very little innovation or extremely disruptive innovation forcing older phones into obsolescence. [For sure, our OSA has been designed to address all these aspects related with backward or downward and forward or upward compatibility as well.]",
"Side-chains are an attempt to allow innovations which will retain compatibility with Bitcoin by pegging the value of a new currency to Bitcoin and creating a two-way convertibility. Unfortunately, it's unclear whether they will be exible enough to accommodate protocols substantially different from Bitcoin. The only alternative so far is to fork the protocol. [Obviously, others have recognized this fundamental problem as well, but sadly to say they came up with their solutions around 8 years too late. See once again the links given in the related comments to the quotes before.]",
"Changes in the protocol are referred to as "forks" [(]not to be confused with blockchain forks which happen within a protocol[)]. [...] Indeed, after a fork, two ledgers exist and users are confronted with a dilemma. How should they value each branch of the fork? [As we said several times now, for example in the Clarification of the 16th of October 2017 and the comment made to the quote about the hard fork problem before, this is a foundational, conceptual problem of the blockchain technique.]",
"Core development teams are a potentially dangerous source of centralization. [...] Even assuming the likely benevolence of a core development team, it represents a weak point on which an attacker could exercise leverage. [One of our best answers to this problem is the foundation of our Society for Ontological Performance and Reproduction (SOPR).]",
"[The blockchain platform] uses its own cryptoledger to let stakeholders coordinate on forks. This allows coordination and enshrines the principle that forks are not valid unless they are endogenous, making it much harder to attack the protocol by moving the consensus. [What should we say? The term endogenous says it all and leads once again to our reflective and self-contained OS.]",
"A C++ code base with a custom binary protocol powers nodes connected to the Internet while holding e-cash, sounds like a recipe for disaster. C++ programs are often riddled with memory corruption bugs. When they are connecting to the Internet, this creates vulnerabilities exploitable by remote attackers. [We think this is cheap politics done to play down our OS, though with our OntoBot software component we have several other programming paradigms and programming languages at hand, such as logic programming and functional programming, that are provided by the integrated SimAgent Toolkit, and with our Computer-Aided Software Engineering (CASE) tools and all the properties, components, and other tools our OS is more capable than anything else.]",
"Other languages do not exhibit those problems. OCaml is a functional programming language developed by the INRIA since 1996 (and itself based on earlier efforts). Its speed is comparable to that of C++ and it generally features among the fastest programming languages in benchmarks. More importantly, OCaml is strongly typed and offers a powerful type inference system. Its expressive syntax and semantics, including powerful pattern matching and higher-order modules, make it easy to concisely and correctly describe the type of logic underpinning blockchain based protocols. [A basic property of the Ontology-Oriented (OO 2) paradigm is an advanced type safety system provided by the ontology part. See also the OntoLix and OntoLinux Further steps of the 5th of July 2017 once again. Together with our OntoBot and other properties, components, and tools of our OS, which by the way even includes OCaml through the interactive theorem prover Coq listed in the Formal Verification of the webpage Links to Software of OntoLinux, we have an unbeatable composition respectively system.],
"OCaml's semantic is fairly rigorous and a very large subset has been formalized, which removes any ambiguity as to what is the intended behavior of amendments. [This sounds like the OS property of (mostly) being well-structured and -formed. We also point to our OntoBot once again.]",
In addition, Coq, one of the most advanced proof checking software is able to extract OCaml code from proofs. As Tezos matures, it will be possible to automatically extract key parts of the protocol's code from mathematical proofs of correctness [See once again the sections Basic Properties of the webpage Overview and Formal Verification of the webpage Links to Software of OntoLinux, where even Coq can be found, which is implemented in OCaml with some small parts implemented in C.]",
"All of these bugs could have been prevented with the use of formal verifcation. Formal verifcation has progressed by leaps and bounds in recent years, it is time to use it in real systems. [See the comments made to the two quotes before and keep in mind that it is already used since around 2 decades to prove embedded systems that control rockets, missiles, and airplanes, as well as already included since around 1 decade in our OS.]",
"Tezos attempts to represent a blockchain protocol in the most general way possible while attempting to remain as efficient as a native protocol. The goal of a blockchain is to represent a single state being concurrently edited. In order to avoid conflicts between concurrent edits, it represents the state as a ledger, that is as a series of transformations applied to an initial state. These transformations are the "blocks" of the blockchain, [...] [So where is the difference between a ledger and a safe, secure, and reliable operating system with a dedicated log-based filesystem or/and a transactional database management system that is Atomic, Consistent, Isolated and Durable (ACID) for example? See the Ontologic File System (OntoFS) software component for example. Furthermore, "[a] number of formalisms for modeling and understanding concurrent systems have been developed, including [...] Petri Nets", which can be found in the section Formal Modeling of the webpage Links to Software, and in the section Formal Verification of the same webpage the model checker Boom is listed, and the combination of the property of being kernel-less reflective and the Object-Oriented (OO 1) paradigm results in the language RbCl, which is "A Reflective Object-Oriented Concurrent Language without Run-time Kernel" listed in the section Exotic Operating System. In addition, in the Feature-List #5 we have the listed our Structured Relational Petri net-based Object-oriented Model (SRPOM), which is an existential multi-rooted Directed Acyclic Graph (DAG).]",
"While the seed protocol relies on a simple super-majority rule with a quorum, more complex rules can be adopted in the future. For instance, the stakeholders could vote to require certain properties to be respected by any future protocol. This could be achieved by integrating a proof checker within the protocol and requiring that every amendment include a proof of constitutionality. [We simply refer to the section Basic Properties of the webpage Overview of our OS OntoLinux once again and also to the section Integrating Architecture of the same webpage.]",
4.2 Amendment Rules [] 4.2.1 Constitutionalism [] While this is more advanced, it is possible to integrate a proof checker within the protocol so that only amendments carrying a formal proof that they respect particular properties can be adopted. In effect this enforces a form of constitutionality. [This proves in particular that our OS enforces constitutionality by its basic properties and in general how original and unique but also elegant and ingenious our OS truly is.]", and
"No matter what innovations other protocols produce, it will be possible for Tezos stakeholders to adopt these innovations. Furthermore, the ability to solve collective action problems and easily implement protocols in OCaml will make Tezos one of the most reactive cryptocurrency. [We do not think so, because our OntoCore and OntoLedger, and our distributed application and ontologic application respectively ontologic service platform OntoCoin and OntoTaler is the only legal one.]"

The second quoted paper has the title "Tezos - a self-amending crypto-ledger [-] White paper".
"We present Tezos, a generic and self-amending crypto-ledger. Tezos can instantiate any blockchain based ledger. The operations of a regular blockchain are implemented as a purely functional module abstracted into a shell responsible for network operations. [We already made clear that the plagiarism is reflective and also universal so to say.]",
"Most importantly, Tezos supports meta upgrades: the protocols can evolve by amending their own code. To achieve this, Tezos begins with a seed protocol defining a procedure for stakeholders to approve amendments to the protocol, including amendments to the voting procedure itself. This is not unlike philosopher Peter Suber's Nomic, a game built around a fully introspective set of rules. [In this context, the term meta upgrade is a synonym for the term reflection and together with the term "evolve" we are directly led to The Proposal. Based on the explanation given by the author of Nomic, Peter Suber, quoted in the related comment to a quote made in relation with the first quoted paper we are allowed to imply that any system similar to the game Nomic must differ from almost any other system, which again implies that our OS must be original and unique, which again implies that Tezos must be a copy.]",
"In addition, Tezos's seed protocol is based on a pure proof-of-stake system and supports Turing complete smart contracts. Tezos is implemented in OCaml, a powerful functional programming language offering speed, an unambiguous syntax and semantic, and an ecosystem making Tezos a good candidate for formal proofs of correctness. [The terms seed and seed protocol references The Proposal once again. Furthermore, a smart contract is a computerized transaction protocol that executes the terms of a contract in a runtime environment, such as a Turing complete platform, virtual machine, or operating system. See once again the OntoBot and the sections Basic Properties of the webpage Overview and Formal Verification of the webpage Links to Software of OntoLinux.]",
"In Tezos, we make a blockchain protocol introspective by letting blocks act on the protocol itself. [As we clarified in relation with the first quoted paper, this property is called being reflective.]",
"We are purposefully not typing the header field more strongly so it can represent arbitrary content. [We even created the Zero Ontology O# for the same reason.]",
"The state is represented with the help of a Context module which encapsulates a disk-based immutable key-value store. The structure of a key-value store is versatile and allows us to efficiently represent a wide variety of states. [First of all we would like to mention that a key-value stores is also called a key-value database. This provides us the direct link to our OntoBase and Ontologic File System (OntoFS) software components. See also the OntoLix and OntoLinux Further steps of the 5th of July 2017 once again.]",
"To avoid blocking on disk operations, the functions use the asynchronous monad Lwt [Lwt is a cooperative thread library. The term cooperative is similar to the term collaborative, which is a basic property of our OS, as we said before. In the field of philosophy, a monad is a term, which means unit and is used by philosophers to signify a variety of entities from a genus to God. In the field of mathematics, specifically in its branch of category theory, a monad (also triple, triad, standard construction and fundamental construction) is an endofunctor (a functor mapping a category to itself), together with two natural transformations. In the field of functional programming, a monad is an abstract datatype or design pattern, which defines how functions, actions, inputs, and outputs can be used together to build generic types respectively how to transfer values and computatins of a simpler type for computation in a higher type, which emerges out of the simpler type by a type constructor, and also the connection of more of several such transfers to a single one. In relation with both meanings, the philosophical and technical meanings respectively ontonical meaning, we discussed the monad and our Zero Ontology (see also the Clarification of the 29th of December 2009 and the Investigations of the 26th of September 2012 (keyword Gödel)). --> The property of the asynchrony can also be found in the section Integrating Architecture of the webpage Overview of OntoLinux.]",
"The Context module uses a combination of memory caching and disk storage to efficiently provide the appearance of an immutable store. [See once again the OntoBase component and the OntoLix and OntoLinux Further steps of the 20th of February 2014.]",
"The score projection always verifies this (ties can be broken based on the hash of the last block). [In the Ontonics, OntoLab, and OntoLinux Further steps of the 8th of October 2012 we discussed a "variant of a log-structured file system based on consistent hashing with finger table. A further extension could be the integration of some more features, like an on-the-fly partioning and formating, checkpoint or/and snapshot management system, and functionalities of a key-value store" in relation with "the file system Fossil of [the operating system] Plan 9, and the Venti network storage system with its 160-bit SHA-1 hash of the data (called here score) that acts as the address of the data, the protocol and algorithm for a peer-to-peer (P2P) distributed hash table with finger table Chord", as well as our Ontologic(-Oriented) (OO 3) Single Address Space Operating System (SASOS) with Software Isolated Processes (SIPs), our project SASOS4Fun, and a related transformation of a Linux kernel based operating system, which for sure meant our OS OntoLinux and our OntoFS. In this relation, it has also to be noted that Fossil is a snapshot file system, which uses Venti for permanent storage, and Venti is a network storage system, which "permanently stores data blocks. A 160-bit SHA-1 hash of the data (called score by Venti) acts as the address of the data. This enforces a write-once policy since no other data block can be found with the same address: the addresses of multiple writes of the same data are identical, so duplicate data is easily identified and the data block is stored only once. Data blocks cannot be removed, making it ideal for permanent or backup storage. Venti is typically used with Fossil to provide a file system with permanent snapshots [...] Since writes are permanent, the file system is append-only [...] Clients can verify the correctness of the server: the score of the returned data should be the same as the address requested. Since SHA-1 is a cryptographically secure hash, it is computationally infeasible to fabricate data." (see also the OntoLix and OntoLinux Further steps of the 5th of July 2017 once again). Moreover, transactions and key-value stores are also discussed in the OntoLix and OntoLinux Further steps of the 13th and 20th of February 2014, and 16th of May 2014, the latter also introduced our OntoBase software component.]",
"The operations parse_block_header and parse_operation are exposed to the shell and allow it to pass fully typed operations and blocks to the protocol but also to check whether these operations and blocks are well-formed, before deciding to relay operations or to add blocks to the local block tree database. [See the OntoBot once again and also the basic property of our OS of (mostly) being well-formed and structured.]",
"These files are compiled on the fly. They have access to a small standard library but are sandboxed and may not make any system call. [The SimAgent Toolkit also does compilation on-the-fly. Besides this, the various advanced safety and security properties of our OntoCore include the standard technique of sandboxing, though it is literally spoken capable of doing much more (see also the cases of the University of Harvard and the company Microsoft in the Investigations::Multimedia, AI and KM of the 28th of August 2017).]",
In order to make the GUI building job's easier, the protocol exposes a JSON RPC API. [The Remote Procedure Call (RPC) model is not the best model for remote interaction as part of distributed computing, though for connecting a GUI it might be sufficient. But we note that RPC is a synchronous message passing technique and in this way the protocol has now the other feature of our integrating architecture as well excluding external synchrony of our OntoCore (see also the Virtual Object System (VOS) for example). Obviously, our Ontologic System Architecture (OSA) has been copied as much as possible.]",
"The name is a list of string to allow namespaces in the procedures. [Here we have another basic feature of our OS, specifically of the functionality of the operating system parts related with file systems and networks.]",
"In lieu of unspent outputs, Tezos uses stateful accounts. When those accounts specify executable code, they are known more generally as contracts. [Here we get the statement out of first hand that an account can specify executable code, which constitutes incredibly valuable legal matter for us.]",
"The language is stack based, with high level data types and primitives and strict static type checking. Its design is insipired by Forth, Scheme, ML and Cat. [We refer to our approach of the Multilingual Multimodal Multiparadigmatic Multimedia Multidimensional Programming (MMMMMP) respectively Ontologic Programming (OP) and once again to our OntoBot. In addition, we note that Forth is a real-time programming language originally developed to control telescopes, which leads us directly to the section Physics of the webpage Organizations of the website of OntoLinux, and can compile itself into a new compiler, which refers once again to the properties of our OS of being reflective and self-adaptive.]", and
"Unfortunately, while this does provide an incentive for one miner to verify the transaction, it does not provide such an incentive to other miners, who must also verify this transaction. In practice, most of the interesting programs that can be used for smart contracts are very short. [This quote is important because it is one of the only two passages in that White Paper that mentions the term "verify". The other passage is "score projection always verifies" and has been already quoted above.]"

The third quoted paper has the title "Tezos [-] The self-amending cryptographic ledger [As we said before, the term self-amending is a synonym for the term being reflective.]",
"[...] Tezos was built to facilitate formal verification, a technique which boosts the security of the most sensitive or financially weighted smart contracts by mathematically proving the correctness of the code governing transactions. [See the related quotes and comments made in relation with the first and second papers above.]",
"The Tezos blockchain will underpin secure, decentralized applications and smart contracts [...]. Tezos was built on the belief that a deep commitment to security, formal verification, and governance that gives stakeholders the power to make protocol decisions is the formula for earning trust and generating widespread adoption on the blockchain. [Somehow we got the impression that other human reasons are the true motivation for the implementation of this system respectively imitation of our Ontologic System (OS). Nevertheless, this deep commitment to provide trust and the specific system properties of a Trusted Computing Base (TCB) in combination with a reflective Turing complete system are essential foundations of our OS and therefore essential parts of the original and unique, characteristic expression of the work of C.S..]",
"Work on Tezos began in 2014 by its founding development team, whose academic experience spans from philosophy to physics, mathematics and computer science, along with professional experience that includes positions at [two large banks], [a well known finanicial journal], and [a large management consulting and professional services company]. [The combination of the various scientific fields sounds familiar, though we do not know why philosophy and physics are needed for the development of a blockchain-based system. But we do know that such a combination of disciplines are needed for the development of e.g. our Caliber/Calibre of our OS. Also highly interesting are on the one hand the relation of that company to the financial sector and on the other hand the proof, that even the financial sector does know our OS, which is not the first time that we make this observation.]",
"In the case of pioneers like Bitcoin and Ethereum, those challenges have manifested themselves in situations that put too much power in the hands of core development teams or miners. In other words, first-generation blockchains have become subject to a form of centralization that their developers sought to avoid. During three years of development, the Tezos team sought to address the need for decentralized innovation in protocol design and emphasized the importance of formal verification in its software design philosophy. [This might be the case but does not bother us and is also totally irrelevant, specifically in relation with our OS and our related copyright and other rights, because we did all this several years before.]",
"While all blockchains offer financial incentives for maintaining consensus on their ledgers, no blockchain has a robust on-chain mechanism to seamlessly amend the rules governing its protocol and explicitly fund protocol development. As a result, first generation blockchains tend to empower, de facto, centralized core development teams or miners to formulate design choices. [A small part of this statement is true, but hardly protectable by the copyright, because our OS includes everything that is required for such a blockchain-based system by its design and adding the missing explicit funding of the protocol development is allowed by the fair use clause or as part of an ordinary technological progress, but only for us and not for others who have no authorized OS.]",
"Tezos takes a fundamentally different approach by creating governance rules for stakeholders to approve of protocol upgrades that are then automatically deployed on the network. [We only say reflective Multi-Agent System (MAS) or Cognitive Multi-Agent System (CMAS) and adding the missing rest is allowed by the fair use clause or allowed as part of an ordinary technological progress, but only for us and not for others who have no authorized OS.]",
"Collectively, the network maintains the decentralized aspect of blockchains while introducing a mechanism to enable collective decision making. Tezos tokens not only power smart contracts in the network, but also allow votes on protocol amendments. [In the Ontonics Website update of the 3rd of February 2013 we added the old project Brokered Network and the new projects Storage in the Cloud and Managed Peer-to-Peer (MP2P), which are based on our OS and provide similar decentralized functions. In addition, we do know that in general Multi-Agent Systems (MASs) do vote as well to find a consensus and make a common decision, and for example we know at least one MAS in the field of the Semantic (World Wide) Web (SWWW), which is based on our OS and has agents that conduct votes. In addition, we note once again that (mostly) being reflective and verified are basic properties of our OS.]",
"Blockchains underpin billions of dollars of value with relatively small codebases, which puts them in the sweet spot for formal verification, a powerful technique that mathematically proves the correctness of computer programs. Formal verification has been used in the aerospace industry, in medical devices, and other instances where the stakes are too high to fail. [The same holds for our OS: The stakes are too high to fail for the OS itself and the many advanced applications and systems based on it, like transactions of a key-value store.]",
"Formally verifying a complex piece of software is a sizable task, so the development team sought to simplify it as much as possible. To that end, we implemented Tezos in OCaml, a functional programming language that has been developed and maintained by the INRIA since 1996 (and itself based on earlier efforts). [...] OCaml is strongly typed and offers an impressive type inference system. Its expressive syntax and semantics, including powerful pattern matching and higher-order modules, make it easy to concisely and correctly describe the type of logic underpinning blockchain based protocols. OCaml's semantic is fairly rigorous and a very large subset has been formalized, which removes any ambiguity as to what is the intended behavior of amendments. In addition, Coq, one of the most advanced proof-checking software tools, is able to extract OCaml code from proofs. As Tezos matures, it will be possible to automatically extract key parts of the protocol's code from mathematical proofs of correctness. [We already explained in detail that our OS has all these features as well, specifically by our OntoBot and the items listed on the webpage Links to Software. specifically in its sections Formal Modeling and Formal Verification, where Coq can be found as well.]",
"The correctness of smart contracts running on the Tezos blockchain is almost as important as that of the core protocol itself. Smart contract bugs can taint the reputation of the platform they operate on. To mitigate that risk, the development team designed our smart contract language with correctness and formal verification in mind. Michelson is statically typed and purely functional. The language itself looks like a mix between Forth and Lisp [...]. The Tezos development team has already successfully proven the correctness of Michelson contracts in Coq, including the multisig contract. []",
"Running a proof-of-stake node also requires more operational security than running a mining operation as it involves signing blocks with a private key on a machine connected to the Internet. This risk can be mitigated by the use of secure hardware components [...]. [This does not solve the foundational problem at all, as proven again and again, and therefore we designed our OS without trusting the underlying hardware at all. The result is discussed in more detail in the Investigations::Multimedia, AI and KM of the 28th of August 2017, the OntoLix and OntoLinux Further steps of the 29th of August 2017, and of course on the webpage of our OntoCore software component.]",
"The initial development team of Tezos has a strong philosophical commitment to formal verification and a keen interest in researching new consensus algorithms for blockchains. [On the one hand the statement "[t]he initial development team [...] has a strong philosophical commitment to formal verification" sounds like nonsense but on the other hand it does sound so unexplainably familiar, specifically when we look at the basic properties of our OS and the section Formal Verification of the webpage Links to Software once again. But we have also the strong ontological commitment to fight plagiarisms of our intellectual properties.]",
"Since Tezos has a built-in governance mechanism, its protocol can evolve and incorporate new innovations over time. In other words, stakeholders can make and enforce decisions about changes to the network using the network itself. [Since our OS is owned by us and has a built-in evolutionary reflection mechanism, we incorporate new innovations whenever it is required. At this point, it can be seen once again that an original and unique, characteristic expression of our OS has been copied that is (mostly) being kernel-less reflective, validated and verified, and also proof-carrying and self-adaptive.]",
"Produce recommendations for operational security of block validators [See the webpage Ontologic Applications of the website of OntoLinux and guess what our OS can do as well.]",
"Privacy preserving transactions and smart contracts are a key feature of modern blockchains. [We would say of modern networking or network computing respectively of our OS.]",
"Zcash makes an impressive use of zero-knowledge proofs to provide full, information theoretic, anonymity, but the risk - however remote - of undetected hyperinflation in the event of a bug in the proof circuit makes some users uncomfortable. [Instead, we have a Zero Ontology and a system based on the fact that Stars don't lie (see also the Clarification of the 17th of October 2017) without any inflation problem.]",
"Our initial plan is to strike a compromise and integrate Zcash's proof circuit in the protocol, but restrict its operations to a special token issued on the Tezos blockchain. This token will be convertible 1 to 1 with Tezos tokens, but the chain will keep track of how many tokens have been converted so that undetected inflation in the privacy preserving token cannot spill over onto the main token. Users who trust the security of the privacy preserving token will have full use of its functionality while those who don't will remain protected as long as they do not make use of the privacy feature. This mechanism replicates the economic behavior of a side chain, but on a single ledger. [We already explained in the Clarification of the 16th of October 2017 that such a management and maintenance of a blockchain has to be done for every other of the new innovations that should be incorporated in such a protocol.]",
"In the long run, the team intends to replace all operations on the blockchain with zero-knowledge proofs. Instead of downloading an entire blockchain a client will be able to download a single proof attesting that the entire blockchain has been validated starting from the genesis hash. However, to that end, they will likely make use of [...] zero[-]knowledge proofs [...] but which do not require a trusted setup. [Obviously, the company found out that the blockchain technique has another conceptual problem in practice, as we also discussed in the Clarification of the 16th of October 2017 and in the comment to the quote before (see also the Clarifiction of the 11th of October 2017).]", and
""Features" are decentralized applications supported at the protocol level. In Ethereum, the prevailing trend is to deploy these "DApps" through App Coins, a way for developers to build specially marked tokens to power applications on an existing network which can be converted in-and-out of the main network token. [This is the same wrong software architecture that we have seen with sandboxing inside a web browser, because security is an operating system task. This is an example for what we said in the Clarification of the 16th of October 2017 when we said that the software stack is perverted.]"

Let us summarize the papers:

Indeed, the programming language Objective Caml (OCaml) is based on the programming language Caml, which is based on the programming language Meta Language (ML), which again is typed and said to be rooted in Lisp, which again is reflective. The interactive theorem prover Coq also supports reflection steps functionality, though the underlying small-scale reflection extension has been added only in the year 2009, which "defines a basis for dividing the proof workload between the user and the prover" on the one hand and seems to be copied from our OS as well on the other hand.
Obviously, essential foundations, properties, and parts of our Ontologic System have been copied, specifically the combination of

• (introspective and) reflective,
• well-structured and -formed,
• validated and verified, and
• specification- and proof-carrying

• asynchronous monad technique,
• reflective state machine based on the asynchronous monad,
• verified
  • transactions and other functions,
  • logic rules, and
  • programms (e.g. smart contracts),
• key-value store, and
• network computing or distributed computing (e.g. Peer-to-Peer (P2P) computing).

In fact, the foundational concept and architecture of that blockchain-based system is a very basic and rudimentary variant of our Caliber/Calibre and artificial brain realized with our OntoFS (see the Investigations::Multimedia of the 18th of December 2009, The Proposal once again, and also the Investigations::AI and Knowledge management, and Robotics of the 24th of September 2010) of our OS.
In addition, it is resembling the belief system of our OS.
This combination constitutes an original and unique, characteristic expression of the work of C.S.. Finding examples of common elements in various different places, specifically OCaml and Coq, as well as a state machine, a key-value store, and P2P computing, does not avoid a causal link and this combination of these elements cannot be declared as a fair use case, because it is an editing of the work of C.S., that is sufficiently similar to confuse the public about the true origin of this combination or composition and this characteristic expression.
In addition, this finding is emphasized by the facts that

Taking all together the verdict is simple: Convicted!!!

The use of that unauthorized platform Tezos is neither allowed due to infringements of several rights of us nor recommended due to the lack of legal certainty and the lack of knowledge and competence in the fields of operating system, networking, and agent-based system, and the many technical deficits resulting from the latter.

Even more worse, the Tezos platform has collapsed and came to a halt shortly after its start due to at least one serious internal problem or even fraud, specifically the very trustworthy manager of its financial foundation or financial trust grabbed into the cash and the very trustworthy founder showed his true nature as a pure opportunist once again. Obviously, they got no consensus. :D
This cannot happen with our SOPR and shows once again another superior aspect of our endeavour.

The same holds for Ethereum Solidity for similar and various other reasons.

On our own's account respectively on the account of our SOPR we would like to note that

22.October.2017
SOPR #32
Share for financial transaction
One specific point that our Society for Ontological Performance and Reproduction (SOPR) team is looking at is the 5% share of the overall revenue for an Ontologic Application (OA) and Ontologic Net (ON), Ontologic Web (OW), and Ontologic uniVerse (OV) Service (OAOOOS or OAO³S) in relation with financial transactions because

Luckily, the copyright for our Ontologics System and its OntoCore and OntoLedger software components is owned by us and our OntoCoin and OntoTaler have become a service platform of our Ontologic Web (OW) already (see the Ontologic Web Further steps of the 20th of October 2017).
In this respect it is incomprehensible that no bank, insurance, stock market, or other actor at the financial markets has asked us for support or membership in our SOPR until today.

Neutrality
One specific point that our Society for Ontological Performance and Reproduction (SOPR) team is looking at is the question how we have to prove our neutrality, which requires that we would not be allowed to have own applications, environments, service platforms, and services in the OS, or any collaborations with a member of the SOPR. Until now, we handled it by avoiding any competition with other companies and only focusing on our own products and services.

Flaw in the Articles of Association (AoA)
We found a serious flaw in the Articles of Association (AoA) of our Society for Ontological Performance and Reproduction (SOPR), though we have considered the aspects but did not include them: the public opinion, decision making, and control democratizing in addition to net neutrality, ownership democracy (95% public vs. fee, 5% share, and veto right private respectively SOPR), and data democracy.
For solving this deficit, we have many options.

OntoLix and OntoLinux Website update
For everybody, who has not seen it already, we have uploaded a first version of the webpage of our OntoLedger component.

As announced in the Further steps of the 20th of October 2017, we will add more informations, which have been publicated already on this website of OntomaX.

OntoLix and OntoLinux Further steps
We have our original and unique, characteristic features of our Ontologic System and their combination and integration, including the

that define the space and time, or world of discourse, discussion, debate, and argumentation, and the

Since the 24th of January 2015 (see also the OntoLix and OntoLinux Website update of the 2nd of May 2016), 7th of July 2017>, and the 2nd of October 2017 once again, we are trying to answer the question if we really need an explicit software component for the fields of

Ontologic Web Further steps
We would like to reveal that our Ontologic Web (OW) also provides a food delivery service platform since the 15th of June 2016 already (see also the Further steps of the 5th of May 2017).

Furthermore, we concluded that enormous synergies can be set free in the financial sectors by the service platform OntoCoin and OntoTaler included in the financial service platform of our Ontologic Web (OW) (see the Further steps of the 20th of October 2017) based on our Ontologics System with the OntoCore, OntoBot, and OntoLedger software components.

23.October.2017
Ontonics Further steps
Some weeks ago, we had to learn once again that the marketing of a supplier misled us in relation with the efficiency of a specific material of our Hoverinium class. But after we looked at the issue, we concluded that the very high efficiency and performance of our materials are sufficient for the intended applications. High-tech is exciting.

In addition, we refined the production process of the first generation of a composite material.

OntoLix and OntoLinux Further steps
We were wondering why we are always saying "Mixed Reality (MR) spectrum respectively reality-virtuality-continuum after our definition". Obviously, it is a long time ago when we created this view and as a consequence we simply forgot that

The webpages Overview and OntoVerse as well as other places of information will be updated when we decided for a final description. Until then we leave it with the common defintions for not confusing the public unnecessarily.

Style of Speed Further steps
In the last days, we worked on our Hoverplane of the second generation (see also the Orignal vs. Inspiration of today and the related Further steps of the 16th and 17th of May 2017, 3rd of August 2017, and 10th of September 2017) and designed new wings, which are more efficient and even foldable.

The foldable variant of the wings allows the construction of the smaller model of our Hoverplan series with the 1+1 seat configuration in such a way that it is small enough to be

• recharged easily at one of our thousands of electric vehicle charging stations already installed worldwide in the variant powered by a pure electric propulsion system or
• refueled easily at one of the thousands of petrol stations in the variant powered by a diesel fuel or gasoline engine.

In this respect we would like to make clear: Where we are flying, we do not need wings, too.
The reason why we are developing wings at all is that there will be a time of transition and wings provide an additional means of safety, as it is also the case with our (redundant) Thermal Protection Systems (TPSs) for our aerospaceplanes and spaceships that have anti-gravity and repulsorlift technologies.

24.October.2017
SOPR #35
We would like to give the reminder that Cyber-Physical Systems of the second generation (CPS 2.0), Internet of Things of the second generation (IoT 2.0), and Networked Embedded Systems of the second generation (NES 2.0) including rural and urban infrastructure, specifically

• Canada, Ontario, Toronto, Quayside, and
• P.R.China, Jiangsu, Wuxi High-Tech Industrial Development Zone,

require the membership in our Society for Ontological Performance and Reproduction (SOPR) for the reasons discussed for example in the Ontonics Further steps of the 20th of October 2017.

In this relation, we also would like to give the reminder that the copyright is an international right and the internationally accepted copyright law is also effective in West Asia, specifically on the Arabian Peninsula, including e.g. Turkey, Saudi Arabia, and Iran.

Articles of Association (AoA) of our Society for Ontological Performance and Reproduction (SOPR)

Used Terms and Abbreviations

A Goals

• fee and 95% share of revenue for members, and
• 5% share of revenue for SOPR,

• steering committees, and
• veto right by SOPR,

• members

B Governing Board

• B.1 Supervisor represented by Ontonics,
• B.2 Social Steering Committee consisting of X members and being chaired by one of them,
• B.3 Cultural Steering Committee consisting of X members and being chaired by one of them,
• B.4 Technical Steering Committee consisting of X members and being chaired by one of them, and
• B.5 Economical Steering Committee consisting of X members and being chaired by one of them.

B.1 Supervisor

• B.1.3.1 resolve a deadlock between members of a [Steering C]ommittee,
• B.1.3.2 resolve a deadlock between the [Steering C]ommittees,
• B.1.3.3 balance the interests of the SOPR members,
• B.1.3.4 harmonize the interests of the SOPR members,
• B.1.3.5 overrule a decision made by a [Steering C]ommittee, and
• B.1.3.6 overrule a decision made by the [Steering C]ommittees

in respect to reaching the goals of the SOPR.

B.2 Social Steering Committee

B.3 Cultural Steering Committee
B.3.1 The Cultural Steering Committee is responsible for ... by the user[s] [all SOPR members]

B.4 Technical Steering Committee
B.3.1 The Technical Steering Committee is responsible for ... by the members of the Inner Circle

B.5 Economical Steering Committee
B.3.1 The Economical Steering Committee is responsible for ... by the members of the Inner Circle

C Membership

• make public specific data,
• use standards and interfaces provided by the SOPR, and
• provide said specific data to the SOPR

for free.

• C.x.v.1 anonymously
• C.x.v.2 anonymized
• C.x.v.3 at the right time
• C.x.v.4 at the right space

D

Terms of Service (ToS)

25.October.2017
OntoLix and OntoLinux Website update
On the webpage of our OntoLedger component we added the new section called Supported Contracts and added the multi-signature account or multisig contract protocol.

On the webpage of our OntoCore component we added in the section History our SASOS4Fun, that we have forgotten to mention in the OntoLix and OntoLinux Further steps of the 29th of August 2017 somehow.

26.October.2017
SOPR #36
Net neutrality vs. specific ystems
One specific point that our Society for Ontological Performance and Reproduction (SOPR) team is looking at is the contrariness of the

A prominent example for the latter is remote (medical) operation by Virtual Reality (VR) and robots.
Luckily, the SOPR provides a trusted environment where the 4 Committees (and the supervisor) can come together, make related decisions, and introduce suitable provisions.

Suspension of legal matter
Our SOPR had to move the date for publicating the binding Articles of Association (AoA) and Terms of Service (ToS) from the end of October 2017 to the end of November 2017 due to

If the situation does not improve, then we have to set the date indefinitely.

Honestly, we are not naive and guess that eventually everybody will come up with some kind of legal tricks and legal wranglings, so that we will have to go the long way (attorneys, prosecutors, etc.) anyway. That said, we have to get clear answers by several large companies and their signs on the contract at first before we can go on officially as planned.
Nevertheless, the SOPR is continuing with its activities as planned and communicated but everything said and done has to be considered as inofficial and therefore not binding in any way.

Herewith, all announcements, statements, concessions, etc. made on this website OntomaX are suspended.

OntoLix and OntoLinux Further steps
For several years, we thought about the problem how the belief system of our Ontologic System (OS) can be guaranteed respectively: Who verifies the verifier (prover, reasoner, or/and checker), that verifes a system? This resulted in the application of the fact that 'Stars don't lie' and the network of telescopes, as well as several other measures (see also the Ontologica, Ontologico, Ontologics of the 21st of May 2016).
But we saw that something is missing between the stars and our Trusted Computing Base (TCB), but only from the point of view of implementation. In a similar way, we also saw recently, when we remembered once again, that the functionalities of the blockchain technique in particular and the distributed ledger technology in general are already included in the software components of our OS and integrated by our Ontologic System Architecture (OSA), that they could fill the gap and provide a more harmonious transition.

As we mentioned in previous messages, we are not completely convinced of the blockchain technique (see the Clarification of the 11th, 16th, and 17th of October 2017, the OntoLix and OntoLinux Further steps of the 13th and 18th of October 2017, and the Ontonics Further steps of the 20th of October 2017). But when we investigated the various blockchain platforms we got more convincing arguments for utilizing this technique in different ways than for realizing a special data store, which resulted in a refinement of our TCB based on the OntoCore with the OntoLedger component, that together can be utilized in accordance with the following rule of thumb:

As it is the case with the management structure of our ON, OW, and OV, and the integrating Ontologic System Architecture (OSA), this trust structure can be described as a layered structure, but in practices it is a hypergraph, an n-dimensional set, or being more precise, a set system or a family of sets drawn from an universal set X.

Hopefully, the sketch of this conceptual detail is already understandable.

27.October.2017
Comment of the Day
The web is the skill™
Superskill™

SOPR #38
In the issue #30 of the 19th of October 2017 we began with looking at the practice of giving away our IPs for free by potential licensees because no revenue is generated in this way. Our Society for Ontological Performance and Reproduction (SOPR) came to the conclusion that it is not our proplem but the problem of said licensees to pay the fee for the access places and access devices, and also the 5% share of the overall revenue generated with the IPs given away for free.

In addition, we added to the section Duties of Members of the Articles of Association (AoA) and the Terms of Service (ToS) of our Society for Ontological Performance and Reproduction (SOPR) the following rule:

• make a report about a potential infringement of a right of the SOPR,
• tell a third entity about a potential infringement of a right of the SOPR, and
• cease a relation to a third entity in the case of an infringement of a right of the SOPR on behalf of the decision made by the Steering Committees

for free.

OntoLix and OntoLinux Website update
On the webpage of the OntoLedger component, we have substituted the section:
"and is compatible with for example the

• Askemos Peer-to-Peer (P2P) computing platform [of the second generation (Askemos 2.0) ...], and
• Hyperledger platform for permissioned blockchain-based systems or blockchain networks,

used for establishing distributed ledgers, distributed settlements, and Decentralized Autonomous Organizations (DAOs)"
with the section:
"and is compatible with frameworks, architectures, and systems for network computing or distributed computing (e.g. Peer-to-Peer (P2P) computing and cloud computing)

• based on the supported contract protocols and blockchain techniques, and
• used for establishing distributed ledgers, distributed settlements, and Decentralized Autonomous Organizations (DAOs)"

to emphasize our neutrality and independency, but also the fact that such technologies are based on our Ontologic System (OS), including our Evolutionary operating system (Evoos).

In a second step, we have renamed the section Supported Contracts into Contract Protocols.

In a third step, we transformed the section Contract Protocols into the point:
supports the contract protocols.

In a fourth step, we added the new point:
supports the blockchain methods

• permissionless and
• permissioned.

In a fifth step, we added the consensus protocols:

Furthermore, on the webpage Links to Software we updated the information that the two systems are better known now as [...] Google Assistant, Microsoft Cortana, Amazon Alexa [...] and Samsung Bixby as well.

28.October.2017
Comment of the Day
Ontokey™

SOPR #39
We updated in the section Duties of Members of the Articles of Association (AoA) of our Society for Ontological Performance and Reproduction (SOPR) the following rules:

• collect specific data,
• make public said specific data,
• provide said specific data to the SOPR, and
• use standards and interfaces provided by the SOPR for handling said specific data,

for free.

• C.x.s.1 select sources of specific data (e.g. Cyber-Physical Systems (CPS), Internet of Things (IoT), and Networked Embedded Systems (NES)) to be collected within the OS, ON, OW, and OV, and
• C.x.s.2 select specific data for being collected within the OS, ON, OW, and OV, and by the OAOOOS and Os

for free.

• C.x.v.1 anonymously,
• C.x.v.2 anonymized,
• C.x.v.3 at the right time, and
• C.x.v.4 at the right space.

The initial set of selected sources and the initial set of specific data are empty.
The reason for this update is that we are neutral in this point of data democracy as well.

To avoid legal loopholes and to provide a formal correct rule we also introduced the following provision to our Terms of Service (ToS):

• a fee of up to 180 U.S. Dollar + triple damage compensations of up to 540 U.S. Dollar for each reproduction of our Ontologic System,
• a fee of up to 180 U.S. Dollar + triple damage compensations of up to 540 U.S. Dollar for each reproduction of our Ontoscope, and
• the overall profit made with an Ontologic System or/and an Ontoscope.

• These fees can be reduced and this overall profit can be transformed to the share of the overall revenue made with our ontologic works in individually made agreements and in this way transformed into a properly registered performance(s) or/and reproduction(s) of our ontologic works.

OntoLix and OntoLinux Further steps
We were asked by two very large companies for an ID agent. In fact, we are already thinking about a special software component in relation with a universal security key for each user or artificial agent called OntoKey, that would be an agent of the overall holistic Cognitive Multi-Agent System (CMAS) included in the OntoBot component and working with the rings and assigned ID spaces of the management structure of our Ontologic Net, Ontologic Web, and Ontologic uniVerse (see the Ontonics Further steps of the 10th of July 2017 and 6th of October 2017) but also even with the other Ontologic System Components (OSC) such as the OntoBase, OntoScope, and OntoLedger components.

29.October.2017
SOPR #40
We have update the following rule suggested in the issue #39 28th of October 2017 (yesterday) with the missing requirement for labelling:

• pay
  • the reduced fee for each reproduction of our Ontologic System,
  • the reduced fee for each reproduction of our Ontoscope, and
  • the share of overall revenue made with our ontologic work(s).

  and

• brand as desired
  • each reproduction of our Ontologic System,
  • each reproduction of our Ontoscope, and
  • each Ontologic Application and Ontologic Net, Ontologic Web, and Ontologice uniVerse Service.

• will be charged with
  • a fee of up to 180 U.S. Dollar + triple damage compensations of up to 540 U.S. Dollar for each reproduction of our Ontologic System,
  • a fee of up to 180 U.S. Dollar + triple damage compensations of up to 540 U.S. Dollar for each reproduction of our Ontoscope, and
  • the overall profit made with an Ontologic System or/and an Ontoscope,

  and

• will be forced to
  • label each reproduction of our Ontologic System with the labels "OntoLab" and "Ontologics" in direct approximity to the label of the related brand and viewable for a user,
  • label each reproduction of our Ontoscope with the labels "OntoLab" and "Ontologics" in direct approximity to the label of the related brand and viewable for a user, and
  • label each Ontologic Application and Ontologic Net, Ontologic Web, and Ontologice uniVerse Service with the labels "OntoLab" and "Ontologics" in direct approximity to the label of the related brand and viewable for a user, and also
  • correct all related publications by telling that the ontologic works have been created by C.S. and have to be licensed by the SOPR.

• These fees can be reduced, this overall profit can be transformed to the share of the overall revenue made with our ontologic work(s), and these requirements for labelling and correcting can be revoked in individually made agreements and in this way the improperly registered performance(s) or/and reproduction(s) of our ontologic work(s) can be transformed into the properly registered performance(s) or/and reproduction(s) of our ontologic work(s).

30.October.2017
Clarification
One specific point that we are looking at are the combinations of

In fact, we have not seen such combinations, which are general examples of Ontologic Applications and items that belong to the field of Cyber-Physical Systems (CPS), Internet of Things (IoT), or Networked Embedded Systems (NES) of the second generation, and if one of them would exist, then it will be very easy to find out that the combination of

did not exist at the relevant time.
Said that, all related smart home solutions presented in the last 10 years are included in our iArchitecture designed and developed by the OntoLab and powered by Ontologics both also created by C.S..

In this respect, we would also like to mention that iArchitecture comprises buildings and infrastructures as well, as its name should suggest, and not only our @home solutions.

SOPR #41
Fee for access device or access point
Another specific point that our Society for Ontological Performance and Reproduction (SOPR) team is looking at is once again the fee for an access device or access point. We observed two points:

So we leave it untouched. :)

Federal SOPR members
In relation with our Society for Ontological Performance and Reproduction (SOPR) we would also like to give the information that governments, states, and cities can become members of the SOPR and even members of one of the Steering Committees as well.
This also suggests that we must add a rule that limits a single entity from taking to much seats in a Steering Committee and also suggest to give each country a seat in at least one Steering Committee.

Definition of entity
This again suggests that we have to define at first what an entity is:

Investigations::Multimedia, AI and KM

Obviously, this time an essential part of our Ontologic System (OS) has been copied without any authorization, specifically our

• Caliber/Calibre,
• Ontologic File System (OntoFS) software component of our OS (see for example the OntoLix and OntoLinux Further steps of the 4th of October 2017 once again), and
• network computing, or being more precise, the internet, grid computing, and cloud computing (see the point "die Netzwerkfunktionen==the network functions" in the chapter 2.2.1 Komponenten eines Betriebssystems==Components of an Operating System of the The Proposal and the section Network Technology of the webpage Links to Software of the website of our OS OntoLinux).

Indeed, another plagiarist has publicated a short summary about the technology of uploading before, that we reproduced in parts in the section Extended Identity of the webpage Terms of the 21st Century publicated on the webpage of the website OntoLinux to stop his attempt as well, and has also copied our IP without any authorization to conduct the same plagiarism like R. Kurzweil with the unauthorized cognitive system of the company International Business Machines (IBM), which we have documented in the Investigations::Multimedia, AI and KM of the 8th, 24th, and 25th of July 2017, and the Clarification of the 26th of July 2017.
But what all these plagiarists overlook again and again are the

For sure: Convicted, once again, as usual. And totally mad.

We do not think that the majority wants such a common coupling through the internet to a Nasty Artificial Intelligence (compare with our Friendly Artificial Intelligence also described on the webpage Terms of the 21st Century) respectively a part of our Ontologic System stolen and perverted to a dystopia similar like the Borgs of the Star Trek saga and the sentient machines of The Matrix saga with human batteries backed by the consensus of selffish, narcissistical, antisocial, opportunistical, greedy, hatefull, untrusthworthy entities.

31.October.2017
0.0.0

Comment of the Day
"Hier bin ich, ich kann noch besser, Gott vertraut mir.", [C.S.]
"Here I am, I can do even better, God trusts in me.", [C.S.]
So let us have a try:
"Here we are, we can do even better, God trusts in us."

For the ones, who are not well versed in the fields of theology we cite a quotation often quoted as part of Martin Luther's statement before the Diet of Worms: "Here I stand, I can do no other, may God help me, Amen."
No eyewitness account exists for this statement, and hence the origins of the quotation is attributed to Georg Rörer, the editor of Luther's collected works, who wanted to add a summary of Luther's documented statement: "[Da] mein Gewissen in den Worten Gottes gefangen ist, ich kann und will nichts widerrufen, weil es gefährlich und unmöglich ist, etwas gegen das Gewissen zu tun. Gott helfe mir. Amen.==[Because] my conscience is entrapped in the words of God, I cannot and do not want to withdraw, because it is dangerous and impossible to do something against the conscience. May God help me. Amen."
It is also found on a woodcut of the year 1557.
Now guess what Luther did 500 years ago.

SOPR #43
The hardcore coders want to see 8 to 10% of the overall revenue generated with an Ontologic Applications (OA) and Ontologic Net (ON), Ontologic Web (OW), and Ontologic uniVerse (OV) Services (OAOOOS) as share. Our opinion is that one part is included in the fees and the other part is included in the accelerated growth and adaption supported by a lower share.

OntoLix and OntoLinux Website update
In the section History of the webpage Overview we corrected the passage:
as part of these self-expressive multimedia works of art
with
as part of these self-expressive works of art that also defined the new field of Ontonics.