• Loris - A Dependable, Modular File-Based Storage Stack
• Flexible, Modular File Volume Virtualization in Loris
• Efficient, Modular Metadata Management with Loris

The works already referenced in the sections File System and Semantic File/Storage System, and these works fit all together and are integrated in a highly elegant way by our Ontologic System Architecture (OSA) and the related components by design and also by exploitation of the basic properties of our OS and the interplay of the OntoCore (OC), Ontologic data storage Base (OntoBase), Ontologic File System (OntoFS), and OntoBot (OB).
For example, the media manager of the Zoochory stack can be integrated with the Loris stack and also the Content Addressable Storage Performance Enhancement by Recipe (CASPER), the Content Addressable Parallel File System (CAPFS), the Cooperative File System (CFS), that interprets Distributed Hash Table (DHT) or eXtensible Array (XArray) blocks as a file system (metadata is data), and the BaseFS of the File System Translator (FiST) system, as well as the various optimization approaches, like Be-tree, XArray, or another data structure with shadowing, controlled write ordering, soft updates, optimistic concurrency, tunable consistency, machine- and user-defined and -selectable data structures, functions, and policies, and all the other referenced techniques, and stacked together by using an approach like FiST and a plug-in architecture like CAPFS, whereby all activities are automated, controlled, and optimized in a smart and intelligent way by using the OntoBot (OB).
See also the

We also substitiuted the reference Filesystem.org with Columbia University, Computer Science Department, Erez Zadok and Jason Nieh et al..

OntoLix and OntoLinux Further steps
Since the Further steps of the 26th of January 2018 we thought about utilizing the libostree for the related part of our Ontologic System (OS) respectively Ontologic Applications (OA) as well.
Specifically interesting in this relation is the content addressable property of the libostree.

Also interesting are the proposals of Linux kernel developers about the

which either

• Ontologic System Architecture (OSA) and
• Ontologic data storage Base (OntoBase), Ontologic File System (OntoFS or OFS), and OntoCore (OC) software components,

(see also the OntoLix and OntoLinux Further steps of the 29th of August 2017) or/and

• cryptographic hash (e.g. Merkle tree), Distributed Hash Table (DHT) (used by e.g. Chord and DHash), and eXtensible Array (e.g. XArray) data structures,
• shadowing technique also used for the Write Anywhere File Layout (WAFL) and Copy-on-Write (COW) techniques, and
• content-addressable technique also used for Content-Addressable Storage (CAS) systems

(see also the OntoLix and OntoLinux Further steps of the 21st of January 2018 and the OntoLix and OntoLinux Website update of today) as well.

02.February.2018
Comment of the Day
"We do not call fees and shares an unjust tax but author's fees, royalties, and fair profit sharing.", [C.S., Today]

Website review
In the case of the Apache Software Foundation in the Investigations::AI and KM of the 14th of January 2018 we already made the correct verdict but in the end were unsure about it. After we reviewed others and our works, and also made a new finding on the 29th of January 2018 we already mentioned in a comment that this new finding might have legal implications in the cases of Recurrent Neural Network (RNN) and Deep Neural Network (DNN) frameworks respectively deep learning systems based on

such as TensorFlow (Google), Keras (Google engineer), Theano-based DNN, MXNet (Apache Software Foundation, Amazon, and many more), CNTK (Microsoft), neon (Intel Nervana), PaddlePaddle (Baidu), and Eclipse Deeplearning4j (DL4J) (IBM, Eclipse Foundation, and many more).

If we have more than 3 exact matches with our Ontologic System (OS), as it is definitely the case here, then we take a closer look if the matches are related to trivial and common items, and trivial and common combinations of them. But in this case we have the following points:

• the origin of these developments or/and
• the prior art,

and

so that we have to

Our claim is emphasized by the fact that all frameworks are already combined or integrated with more features of our OS:

Individual frameworks are also used for products and applications such as

we mean for example the companies Microsoft, Amazon, and Baidu, but also Qualcomm, Nvidia, Intel, and Softbank→ARM, and also Samsung and other companies must be looked at as well.

The reason why we are still talking about these issues is that we only found them out recently and that they complete the whole picture of activities, which continues to make us speechless again and again.
In this relation it might also be interesting that after the issue of these DNN frameworks on the 14th of January 2018 we decided at first to stop the activities of our Society for Ontological Performance and Reproduction (SOPR) and instead to go to the prosecutors. And then the issues with Chainer and OpenEmbedded followed.

03.February.2018
Style of Speed Further steps
We overworked the basic design of the three Multivector models mentioned in the Further steps of the 2nd of September 2017 that are now more efficient and better to operate.
In a subsequent step we could also integrate this design with another design of us.

Btw.: We have noticed the advances of a helicopter manufacturer with its cabin that was presented without a specific propulsion system.

04.February.2018
Ontonics Further steps
We developed a new module and a new composite material.

iRaiment Further steps
We worked on a module for specific smartwatch and wrist-worn Ontoscope models.

05.February.2018
Website update
As a consequence of the Clarification of today, we added to the Investigations::Multimedia, AI and KM of the 12th of October 2017 the addtional information "(see also The Proposal and the section History of the webpage Overview of the websites of OntoLinux)".

For sure, this has consequences specifically in relation with our argumentation in the fields of Cyber-Physical Systems (CPS), Internet of Things (IoT), and Networked Embedded Systems (NES).

What a luck and really exciting.

Clarification
Sometimes you win, sometimes you loose, but sometimes you win again. We saw that in our discussions about Cyber-Physical Systems (CPS) the fact has been overlooked that conceptually our Evolutionary operating system (Evoos) described in The Proposal does not only belong to the field of Cyber-Biological Systems (CBS) but also to CPS, because it was also created as a first model or digital twin of C.S., as also explained in the section History of the webpage Overview of the website of OntoLinux.

This is also interesting when viewed in relation with other systems and activities in the fields of Cyber-Physical Systems (CPS), Internet of Things (IoT), and Networked Embedded Systems (NES), such as the Virtual Object System (VOS) and the Industry 4.0 approach for example.

Indeed, in the last years we had to learn to communicate and talk about the ontologic works, and to find the right words and sometimes also the right arguments and conclusions when doing so, because some concepts and properties of these works just exist for us without further thinking about them and explicitly mentioning them.

iRaiment Further steps
We designed new smartwatch and wrist-worn Ontoscope models.

08.February.2018
OntoLix and OntoLinux Further steps
We are pleased to announce the official start of our new file system, which on the one hand can be utilized alone as a substitute for other file systems and on the other hand is taken as a prototype for the further research and development of our Ontologic data storage Base (OntoBase) and Ontologic File System (OntoFS) software components.
In the first step, a very well known file system will be reconfigured in a first phase and then refitted to the new configuration in a second phase, so to say, which is followed by an expansion of its functionality with highly interesting features in a subsequent phase before we will find out how we can integrate it in the OntoBase and OntoFS, or if we only take the insights gained from its development for the further development of our OS.
Nevertheless, this file system can be utilized in production systems just right from the start and might very well become a standard file system for operating systems based on the Linux kernel or BSD Unix.

In this relation, we would like to give the additional information that our original and unique OntoFS seems to become the new industry standard because it solves several basic problems of traditional file systems with its dynamic graph-based structure, namespace management, and many other features (see for example the Further steps and Website update of the 1st of February 2018), and provides much more solutions and functionalities as part of its integration with the OntoBase, OntoBot (OB), and OntoScope, and also OntoNet, OntoWeb, and OntoVerse software components, as well as the other Ontologic System Components (OSC) by our Ontologic System Architecture (OSA).

Btw.: Do not base your works on plagiarisms.

09.February.2018
Ontonics Further steps
We worked on our next anti-gravity and repulsorlift technologies and looked at a conceptual detail that might reduce the factor of amplification by a considerable amount (see for example the Further steps of the 4th and 13th June 2017).

Ontonics Further steps Urban Air Mobility special
We would like to ask the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) and other federal aviation authorities to expand the regulation for aerial vehicles with Vertical Take-Off and Landing (VTOL) capability, like for example delivery drones and passenger drones, and only issue a Certificate of Airworthiness (CofA) for such an aircraft when utilized for Urban Air Mobility (UAM) if it has the following features:

That said, not qualified are for example

In a subsequent step

should be allowed for VTOL aircrafts utilized for Urban Air Mobility (UAM) respectively

should become mandatory.
For sure, this legal provision could be installed immediately.
Our Velocity like passenger drone already has CofA as can be seen easily on the related images of the Original vs. Inspiration of the 10th of September 2017.

Eventually, the operation with our Ontologic System and the integration with our Ontoverse, Hovercity, Hoverland, and Superstructure, as well as the certification by Ontonics are required (see also the Clarification of the 23rd of May 2017).

Welcome to OntoLand
Welcome in our Ontoverse and Superstructure
Welcome to Hovercity and Hoverland

11.February.2018
Ontonics Further steps
We worked on three older technologies and related components, modules, and devices.
The first technology has been confirmed (once again).
The second technology has been confirmed (once again) and improved slightly.
The third technology emerged while looking around for other solutions and playing around with components out of the stocks of our suppliers and us.
What makes these technologies and their realizations very interesting is that they work much better than anything else available, mildly said, while remaining affordable and in this way could be very well the foundations for killer products.

iRaiment Further steps
We could sgnificantly simplify the module for smartwatch and wrist-worn Ontoscope models mentioned in the Further steps of the 4th of February 2018.

12.February.2018
Website update
We added to the OntoLix and OntoLinux Website update of the 1st of February 2018 the two references

for making it easier for our fans and readers to find the connection, or better said, the integration of the Ontologic data storage Base (OntoBase) and Ontologic File System (OntoFS) software components of our Ontologic System (OS) with the Log-Structured Merge (LSM) tree (LSM-tree) data structure.

13.February.2018
Comment of the Day
Kdtrfs™
Kdtrdb™
Kddb™

Website update
We thought about structured data and suddenly saw that the Structured Entity-Relationship-Model (SERM) integrated in our ontologic model and the technique of the blockchain have the common features of existentiality and time-dependency or causal dependency, which shows once again that eventually the blockchain technique is implicitly included in the Ontologic data storage Base (OntoBase) and Ontologic File System (OntoFS).
Accordingly, we added the point

to the OntoLix and OntoLinux Further steps of the 5th of July 2017.

OntoLix and OntoLinux Website update
We added to the sections Network Technology of the webpage Links to Software the link:

We knew that the eXtensible Array (e.g. XArray) data structure presented by a developer of a very well known company has a relation with what we are doing. The lookup method Chord# shows a general problem of hash-based distributed systems (range queries) on the one hand and why Chord# and XArray have been developed as a substitute for data structures and distributed networking algorithms based on hash functions on the other hand.
Needless to say, we already have included such data structures and algorithms in our

software components to overcome the limitations of

We also added to the section File System of the same webpage the links:

The discussions about bLSM, BtrFS, BetrFS (see the linked paper Optimizing Every Operation in a Write-Optimized File System), as well as other similar data structures, algorithms, and schemes (e.g. tunable consistency of the Content Addressable Parallel File System (CAPFS) for example) show nicely the foundational problem: On the one hand there is no operating system and no file system that fits for all applications and on the other hand the various approaches converge more and more.
But luckily, there is one more thing: Our Ontologic System. We do not follow specific ideologies about how a computing system has to be designed and implemented, apply fixed system behaviours and schemes, and have gears and springs, but instead we have our

• reflective,
• self-adaptive or self-optimizing,
• self-organizing or self-managing,
• self-regenerative or self-healing, and
• intelligent,

and

• Artificial Intelligence (AI),
• Machine Learning (ML)
  • Artificial Neural Network (ANN)
    • Deep Neural Network (DNN),
• Evolutionary Computing (EC), and
• Cognitive Multi-Agent System (CMAS),

and our OntoCore (OC) and OntoBot (OB) software components can utilize all the OS properties and SB parts, such as for example the same Deep Neural Networks (DNNs) copied by other entities for self-teaching or self-learning autonomous cars, software agents playing games like e.g. Go, and cognitive agents without initial instruction, as gears and springs of our Caliber/Calibre, so to say, to provide services for all these tasks and realize self-optimizing, self-healing, self-managing, and intelligent storage nodes.
In this relation, data structures like for example hash, Bloom filter, B-tree, B+-tree, Be-tree, LSM-tree (append-only B-trees), R-tree, Distributed Hash Table (DHT), eXtensible Array, etc. (see also the OntoLix and OntoLinux Website update and Further steps of the 1st of February 2018) included in our OntoBase and OntoFS are used by the OC and OB as elementary building blocks for the construction of arbitrary data storage systems but also as fallbacks when SB functions might fail for some reasons.

Interestingly, the improvements of b-tree and LSM-tree data structures and their convergence, specifically by applying the partitioning technique, improve the performance of the kd-tree data structure as well but also allows its application, integration, and distribution in common data storage systems virtually for free.
Consequently, we also added to the section File System the links:

For our fans and readers, who still have not seen it, we are already talking about

• k-dimensional binary tree (k-d tree or kd-tree)
  • k-dimensional B-tree (k-d-B-tree or kdb-tree),
  • k-dimensional B+-tree (kdB+-tree),
  • k-dimensional Be-tree (kdBe-tree or kde-tree; C.S.),
• Bkd-tree
  • Bkd-tree with hBpi-tree (BkdhBpi-tree or Bkdpi-tree; C.S.),
  • Bkd-tree with Be-tree (Bkdbe-tree or Bkde-tree; C.S.),
• combinations of kd-tree, Bkd-tree, and LSM-tree
  • kd-tree with bLSM (kd-bLSM or kdbLSM; C.S.),
    • kdB-tree with bLSM (kdB-bLSM or kdbbLSM),
    • kdBe-tree with bLSM (kdBe-bLSM, kde-bLSM, or kdeLSM),
    • Bkd-tree with bLSM (Bkd-bLSM or BkdbLSM),
    • Bkdpi-tree with bLSM (Bkdpi-bLSM),
    • Bkdbe-tree with bLSM (Bkdbe-bLSM or Bkde-bLSM),
• any other combination of their basic parts respectively etc., etc., etc.,

and

specifically for the realization of

or simply said Ontologic Systems.

Furthermore, we realize data storage systems for block-based and Object-Oriented (OO 1) storage systems, that manage disk block allocation internally and allow to read and write to variably-sized and named objects, but also for Ontology-Oriented (OO 2) and Ontologic(-Oriented) (OO 3) storage devices, and it should have become obvious that we do avoid to use hash-based methods for our self-healing, self-managing, and intelligent data storages and object storage nodes, for example by using Chord#, XArray, and the other basic blocks and features of our OntoBase and OntoFS (see also the OntoLix and OntoLinux Further steps of the 21st of January 2018, the OntoLix and OntoLinux Further steps and OntoLix and OntoLinux Website update of the 1st of February 2018, and above ).

Have we promised too much?
This is a serious copyright warning in respect of the characteristical artistical expression or general concept, the (data storage) system architecture and the components, as well as the specific collection, selection, dissection, and re-integration of foundational elements and this components in accordance with this system architecture (keywords Associative Memory (AM) and cybernetic self-reflection).

Btw.: Do not base your works on plagiarisms.

We highly recommend every company to introduce multi-licensing for their products, so that their license models become compatible with the provisions of our Society for Ontological Performance and Reproduction (SOPR).
Everybody else can see once again now, why we claim for international copyright of the ontologic works of C.S. and asking for fixed fees and why a share for their reproduction and performance is more than reasonable and fair.

OntoLix and OntoLinux Further steps
In the Further steps of the 8th of February 2018 we talked about a new file system. In the OntoLix and OntoLinux Website update of today we talked about kd-tree data structures. Counting both together yields in the name of our new file system: Kd-tree File System (KdtrFS or Kdtrfs).
The basic Kd-treeFS is simply the very well known B-tree File System (BtrFS or Btrfs) with a kd-tree instead of a B-tree, or even the Be-tree File System (BetrFS or Betrfs) with a kde-tree. Advanced versions feature a combination of a kd-tree and a LSM-tree as foundational data structure, such as the Bkd-tree, Bkde-tree, bLSM-tree, or another combination.
Variants for Solid State Disc (SSD) and Non-Volatile Random Access Memory (NVRAM) as well as a Kd-tree DataBase (Kdtrbd or Kddb) with the same foundation should also be available if the demand for these variants will emerge or already exists.

It is intended to offer the basic Kdtrfs and Kddb by multi-licensing.

15.February.2018
Investigations::Multimedia, AI and KM

The second document is about the dynamic graph-based foundations of our Ontologic File System (OntoFS) that is inspired by the structure and working of a brain, specifically after the brain of C.S., and is realizing a related structure and working in ontological and geometrical/spatial ways for example on the basis of the Resource Description Framework (RDF) and the Web Ontology Language (OWL) (see the section Integrating Architecture of the webpage Overview of the website of OntoLinux and the last subsection of the last section of the Investigations::Multimedia of the 18th of December 2009 for an additional explanation) on the one hand and has been related to new questions about the validity of the theory of galaxy formation called the Hierarchical Model on the other hand (see the Comment of the Day of the 14th of July 2008):
"Copernicus: A Scalable, High-Performance Semantic File System [The title says it all already, because we have here a connection with semantic file systems, but also with the topics telescope, universe, stars, and Copernicus. See the webpage of the OntoFS, the section Semantic File/Storage System of the webpage Links to Software, the section Ontologic uniVerse of the webpage Overview, the webpage about our Caliber/Calibre, the section Physics of the webpage Links to Organizations of the website of OntoLinux, and the Comment of the Day of the 14th of July 2008, and also the Pictures of the Day of the 5th of March 2012, and the first quote made in relation with the first investigated document.]",
"Hierarchical file systems do not effectively meet the needs of users at the petabyte-scale. Users need dynamic, search-based file access in order to properly manage and use their growing sea of data. This paper presents the design of Copernicus, a new scalable, semantic file system that provides a searchable namespace for billions of files. Instead of augmenting a traditional file system with a search index, Copernicus uses a dynamic, graph-based file system design that indexes file attributes and relationships to provide scalable search and navigation of files. [Obviously, an essential part of our OntoFS is copied here, as a comparison with the section Ontologic File System and a further look at the Comment of the Day of the 14th of July 2008 proves, which constitutes a copyright infringement as well as an infringement of other rights of C.S. and our corporation, because the public and the scientific community has been deliberately misled about the true origin of our original and unqiue ontologic works. Besides this, do not be confused by the term to augment because the subject matter is not about Augmented Reality (AR).]",
"This paper makes the following contributions: (1) it argues that search and a semantic namespace should be primary goals of the file system; (2) it presents some basic requirements and challenges for building a solution; (3) and presents the design of Copernicus, a file system that aims to address these challenges at large scales. The core of the Copernicus file system is a dynamic graph-based index that clusters semantically related files into vertexes and allows inter-file relationships to form edges between them. This graph replaces the traditional directory hierarchy, can be efficiently queried, and allows the construction of dynamic namespaces. The namespace allows "virtual" directories that correspond to a query and navigation using inter-file relationships. Additionally, by integrating search directly into the file system Copernicus can effectively scale to billions of files. [The short comment is: Fraud. The longer comment proves that fraud: "By integrating semantic (world wide) web technologies, especially the Resource Description Framework (RDF) and the Web Ontology Language (OWL)", which describe conceptual graphs and also semantic networks consisting of vertices and representing concepts, and edges, which again represent semantic relations between concepts, "we have enhanced the paradigms of standard file and database management systems with the ability of [...] file indexing [and] file searching" and provide functionalities users and most fascinating the information processing system itself are able to interact with the ontologic file systems by browsing graphs, or trees/hierarchies of files/directories, [and] query the file systems like information retrieval systems", as said in the section Ontologic File System of the OntoFS webpage. In additon, "the Ontologic Scene Graph, which as a super set is including semantic and ontology based scene graphs as well, of the Ontologic Collaborative Ontologic Virtual Environment (OntoCOVE), which is an essential part of our OntoScope component, is seemlessly integrated as well" in the OntoFS by the Ontologic System Architecture (OSA). Furthermore, the OSA also integrates the OntoFS and the OntoScope, which also includes graph visulization, with the OntoBot software component, which includes the functionality based on rewriting theory, specifically term graph rewriting utilized for generating, transforming, and processing abstract semantic graphs or term graphs, and also other graph rewriting. At this point, even a non-expert should be able to see that our OntoFS already provides a semantic namespace, as well as other basic elements and functionalities, is based on a dynamic graph-based index that clusters semantically related files, allows inter-file relationships, and can do much more, obviously, doubtlessly, and definitely, and hence we have the next evidence for the copyright infringement. Besides this, like the term to augment has nothing in common with Augmented Reality (AR) in relation with that plagiarism, the term virtual has nothing in common with Virtual Reality (VR) in relation with that plagiarism, though we guess it was also said to confuse the public even more.]",
"By searching the provenance links of those files, the scientist can find which DNA sequencing libraries or input parameters are the common factor for all of the result files. [See once again the section Semantic File/Storage System of the webpage Links to Software and also the applications of the subcomponents of the OntoBot, specifically of the Pathway Logic, which are combined with our OntoFS.]",
"Semantic file systems provided better methods for accessing files, but were designed as applications above the file system which caused serious performance and consistency problems. [...] However, current solutions are applications that reside separately from the file system. [We refer to the detail that we call our OntoFS an Ontologic File System, which for sure includes semantic file systems as well by integrating their functionalities in our data storage system respectively "file system-based approach of the OntoFS architecture", as proven in the related comments made to the quotes before. If this statement is true and accepted by the scientific community respectively the public, then we would like to thank the plagiarists very much for providing the next proof for the originality and uniqueness of our OntoFS in particular and our Ontologic System (OS) in general.]",
"Separate search applications are not an ideal solution because they require a level of indirection that is inefficient. [So we put them into our data storage system OntoFS more than 3 years before that plagiarism has been published.]",
"We posit that a scalable, searchable namespace is functionality that file systems should provide because 1) it is becoming increasingly important functionality, 2) a separate application limits scalability and usability and 3) the file system already provides existing indexing functionality that can be leveraged. Other recent work supports the idea that "hierarchical file systems are dead" [...]. [The fact is that we posited these points and designed our OntoFS accordingly, and those plagiarists only copied what we did some years before and edited our related publications.]",
"Flexible naming. The main drawback with current hierarchies is their inability to allow flexible and semantic access to files. Files should be able to be accessed using their attributes and relationships. Thus, the file system must efficiently extract and infer the necessary attributes and relationships and index them in real-time. [This has been stolen. We simply refer to the comments made to the related quotes.]", "Dynamic navigation. While search is extremely useful for retrieval, users still need a way to navigate the namespace. Navigation should be more expressive than just parent → child hierarchies, should allow dynamically changing (or virtual) directories and need not be acyclic. Relationships should be allowed between two files, rather than only directories and files. [See once again the features "interact with the ontologic file systems by browsing graphs, or trees/hierarchies of files/directories, [and] query the file systems like information retrieval systems" listed in the section Ontologic File System of the OntoFS webpage and also its integration with the OntoScope.]",
Scalability. Large file systems are the most difficult to manage, making it critical that both search and I/O performance scale to billions of files. Effective scalability requires fine-grained control of file index structures that allow disk layouts and memory utilization to properly match workloads. [This has been stolen. See for example the sections Advantages and File System of the OntoFS webpage and also the section Basic Properties of the webpage Overview of the website of OntoLinux. In fact, we can change everything at runtime and even in real-time due to the property of being reflective, which holds for every property of the OntoFS as well. One OS fits all users.]",
Backwards compatibility. Existing applications rely on hierarchical namespaces. It is critical that new file systems be able to support legacy applications to facilitate migration to a new paradigm. [As we already recalled above, the OntoFS allows to "interact with the ontologic file systems by browsing graphs, or trees/hierarchies of files/directories".]",
"Copernicus is designed as an object-based parallel file system so that it can achieve high scalability by decoupling the metadata and data paths and allowing parallel access to storage devices [...]. [Obviously, the OntoFS is also based on the Object-Oriented (OO 1) paradigm, as said in the section Ontologic File System of its webpage, and can be executed on parallel computing systems, as can be seen with for example the features "Multiprocessing" and "Parallel operating of graphic cards, and other multimedia cards" listed in the Feature-List #1.]",
"Object-based file systems consist of three main components: clients, a metadata server cluster (MDS), and a cluster of object-based storage devices (OSD). Clients perform file I/O directly with OSDs, but submit metadata and search requests to the MDS, which manages the namespace; thus, most of the Copernicus design is focused on the MDS. [At this point we recall that the first document is about metadata handling.]",
"Copernicus achieves a scalable, semantic namespace using several new techniques. A dynamic graph-based index provides file metadata and attribute layouts that enable scalable search [...]. [Here we can also see that the aspect of geometry mentioned in the section Ontologic Virtual Reality Environment of the OntoFS webpage has been copied as well.]",
"Inter-file relationships, such as provenance [...] and temporal access patterns [...], create edges between files that enable semantic navigation. [This has been stolen as well, as the comments made to the related quotes show doubtlessly.],
"Directories are "virtual," and are instantiated by queries. [This is a simple implication of the functionalities of the OntoFS.]",
"Clusters store metadata and attributes in search optimized index structures. The use of search indexes for native storage mechanisms allows Copernicus to be easily searched without additional search applications. [See the comments made to the related quotes.]",
"Finally, a new journaling mechanism allows file metadata modifications to be written quickly and safely to disk while still providing real-time index updates. [Very obviously, various journaling mechanisms are also included in our OntoFS.]",
"Each file is represented with an inode and is uniquely identified by its inode number. Inodes and associated attributes-content keywords and relationships-are grouped into physical clusters based on their semantic similarity. [Another semantic similarity is the fact, that this explanation is about the purpose and function of the RDF included in our OntoFS, whereby "[t]he subject of an RDF statement is either a [U]niform [R]esource [I]dentifier (URI) or a blank node, both of which denote resources, [...t]he predicate is a URI which also indicates a resource, representing a relationship[, and t]he object is a URI, blank node or a Unicode string literal. As of RDF 1.1 resources are identified by [Internationalized Resource Identifiers (]IRIs[), which ...] is a generalization of URI". We really do hope that it is needless to explain what a resource and a relationship of an RDF statement represents in the context of an Ontologic File System (OntoFS).]",
"Given a file's inode number, a pseudo-random placement algorithm, CRUSH [...], identifies the locations of the file's data on the OSDs, meaning data pointers are not stored within the inode. [This explanation is interesting from two points of view. Firstly, the Controlled Replication Under Scalable Hashing (CRUSH) function has been developed by one of the two fraudulent ring leaders as well as part of the distributed file system respectively object storage platform Ceph. Secondly, we use Chord#, XArray, and other suitable data structures and algorithms for the controlled, scalable, decentralized placement of replicated data as another original and unique feature of the related OS functionalities instead of hash-based approaches.]",
"Inodes are grouped into clusters using clustering policies, which define their semantic similarity. Clustering policies may be set by users, administrators, or Copernicus, and can change over time, allowing layouts to adjust to the current access patterns. [Somehow, a cluster reminds us of semantic graphs, ontologies, and the OWL that groups RDF links, so to say. Furthermore, the functionality of layout adjustment by such a data storage system as some kind of self-adaption or self-optimization has been stolen from our OntoFS as well.]",
"Copernicus creates a namespace using the semantic relationships that exist between files. [This reminds us of semantic graphs, ontologies, and also RDF and OWL once again.]",
"Unlike a traditional file system, links only exist between two files [So two files and a (typed) relationship or link between them constitute a triple or tuple, which equals an RDF statement and hence reflects once again the RDF.]",
"[...] directories in Copernicus are "virtual" and simply represent the set of files matching a search query. [This is not a new data storage system feature.]",
"Relationships are directed and are represented as triples of the form <relationship type, source file, target file>, and can define any kind of relationship. Relationship links may exist between files within the same or different clusters [...]. The graph need not be acyclic, permitting more flexible relationships. [Bingo!!! This proves that our OntoFS has been copied and its description merely edited, because the OntoFS is integrating semantic (world wide) web technologies, especially the RDF and OWL. Besides this, the Reiser4 file system was not included in the Linux kernel because the feature "[m]etadata is stored as sub-files, so a file is actually a folder and a file, and metadata can be attached to any other file" can lead to cyclic dependances, which has been refuted by leading developers on the one hand but on the other hand provides us the next very convicting evidence for the copyright infringement. We discussed this point in more detail in the OntoLinux Further steps of the 21st of August 2010. See also the comment made to the third quote in relation with the first investigated document above.]",
"A key advantage of multi-dimensional search trees is that all metadata attributes can be indexed in a single structure, as opposed to a B-tree, which would require one per attribute. [As far as we do know, that single indexing structure is partitioned in several structures, so that a similar structure can be realized by partitioning a k-dimensional b-tree, as done with the Bkd-tree data structure and us with the OntoBase and OntoFS (see the OntoLix and OntoLinux Website update of the 13th of February 2018) and our new Kdtrfs and Kdtrfs file systems (see the OntoLix and OntoLinux Further steps of the 13th of February 2018).]",
"Relationship attributes are also stored in a K-D tree. KD trees allow any combination of the relationship triple to be queried. [Once again we have here a feature that equals semantic (world wide) web technologies and therefore our OntoFS.]",
"Each cluster stores full-text keywords, which are extracted from its files' contents using application-specific transducers [...]. [We also use in addition ontologies and their combinations for example and for sure all SoftBionics (SB) functionalities through the integration with our OntoBot.]",
"All file accesses (e.g., open() and stat()) translate to queries over the Copernicus graph index. While navigation can be done using graph traversal algorithms, queries must also be able to identify the clusters containing files relevant to the search. Since semantically related files are clustered in the namespace, it is very likely that the vast majority of clusters do not need to be searched. This has already been shown to be the case in hierarchical file systems [...], despite only modest semantic clustering. [Indeed, the graph-based file access is another option besides the tree-based file access of hierarchical file systems. The first investigated document is one of the mentioned hierarchical file systems.]",
"Unfortunately, K-D trees do not efficiently handle frequent inserts and modifications. Inserting new inodes into the tree can cause it to become unbalanced, degrading search performance. [Unfortunately for the plagiarists and fortunately for us, our OntoBase and OntoFS can do exactly this as well and much more (see once again the OntoLix and OntoLinux Website update of the 13th of February 2018). This raises the question why they have not work on this general problem instead of stealing our OntoFS but also shows another time that even our idea and concept of the OntoFS taken alone is an original and unique, and therefore copyright work of art, because experts in the related field of data storage even did not think at all about solving all these problems that we solved in this way, specifically by changing many common file system concepts.]", and
"Because Copernicus changes many common file system concepts, a number of practical questions remain open. First, how effectively does a generic graph index scale and how effective are search trees at handling file system workloads? Second, what are the challenges with providing needed functionality such as security? Third, can the Copernicus graph be leveraged for better file search result ranking or interface? [Obviously, the plagiarists did not know what to steal next.]".

In relation with these plagiarisms, we wondered all the time why the first investigated document is only about metadata indexing, searching, and querying, and only mentions in the epilog indexing, searching, and querying of a file's content or file data, and relationships between files. We also noted the time gap of much more than 1 year between the publication of the first document (around 21st to 28th of May 2008) and the publication of the second document (8th of October 2009). Correspondingly, we thought at first that the first document is independent of the second document.
But in the course of this investigation we also saw that the first document is solely focused on data storage systems with a hierarchical structure and only about the features of our OntoFS related to metadata handling, and that the relevant content of the OntoFS webpage related to metadata is based on the description given on the webpage of the Reiser4 file system, which has been referenced on the website of our OS OntoLinux since its beginning.

Indeed, it could still be argued that the first document does not infringe our rights. But on the one hand the first document prepares something as a future work and even announces essential parts of the data storage system described in the second document, obviously, and on the other hand the second document makes clear that the graph-based data storage system described therein is the further development of the hierarchical data storage system described in the first document, doubtlessly, so that both documents constitute parts of the same series.

Furthermore, when all these evidences are viewed together, then it becomes obvious somehow that the plagiarists were unable for temporal or legal reasons to copy the additionally disclosed features of the OntoFS related to graphs, contents, and relationships of files in a complete and elaboration into the first document in the less than 6 weeks left between the publication of our OntoFS webpage (see the OntoLinux Website update of the 10th of April 2008) and the publication date of the first document, so that only the part related to metadata, which was already known to be included in our OntoFS by the reference of the Reiser4 file system, its related website content, and the already published content of the OntoFS webpage, became the subject matter of the first document and the missing detailed description of the features related to graphs, contents, and relationships of files became the subject matter of the second document.
This view is also emphasized by the facts, that "Spyglass uses a novel partitioning scheme that exploits the clustering of metadata values within the file system hierarchy" and "[t]he Spyglass index design utilizes two key concepts: hierarchical partitioning", but only after our publication of the OntoFS webpage (see also the Comment of the Day of the 14th of July 2008) the plagiarists could react and find out that "[t]he main drawback with current hierarchies is their inability to allow flexible and semantic access to files" respectively that the hierarchical approach is not sufficient for solving the foundational problem on the one hand and for stealing our OntoFS on the other hand.

From the legal point of view this case is clear, because the description (more syntactical aspect) and also the original and unique idea or concept (more semantical and expressive aspect) of our OntoFS have been copied as well as the connection with a scope, the stars, the universe, and a worldview or (philosophical) belief system with two related or coherent documents and their titles, that merely constitute illegal editings of our prior art. In addition, even the originality and uniqueness of this specific part of our OS has been confirmed by the plagiarists, as we already noted in a related comment, and therefore the infringements of our copyright and other rights are obvious: Convicted!!!

But the investigative case of today has to be viewed from a much broader point of view as well.
In the last years, we collected more evidences of other attempts to steal our data storage system, specifically the OntoFS software component of our Ontologic Systems OntoLix and OntoLinux.

The "Copernicus is designed as an object-based parallel file system" referencing Ceph based on CRUSH, which is also developed by one of the two fraudulent ring leaders, and based on the data structures k-d trees or kd-trees (k-dimensional binary search trees or k-dimensional B-trees) referencing Spyglass, which utilizes the technique of kd-tree versioning by making snapshots based on the Copy-on-Wright (CoW) technique, and also on the technique of partioning, and either utilizes some other techniques or suggestes their utilization. In addition, "[o]bject-based file systems consist of three main components: clients, a metadata server cluster (MDS), and a cluster of object-based storage devices (OSD). Clients perform file I/O directly with OSDs, but submit metadata and search requests to the MDS, which manages the namespace; thus, most of the Copernicus design is focused on the MDS."
Interestingly, the CoW and B-tree based file system called Btrfs initially designed and developed by the company Oracle is one of the recommended underlying file systems for Ceph on the one hand and on the other hand the developers of the Be-tree and fractal tree based in-kernel file system called Betrfs are also referencing Ceph and Spyglass in their latest documents of the years 2016 and 2017 in relation with the partioning technique, though referencing much more foundational works instead could have been done as well, as we did.
This shows that all three file systems have taken other directions of development than we did but also suggests that the combination of at least Ceph, Spyglass, and Betrfs are regarded as a loophole to circumvent our OntoBase and OntoFS one more time.
Nevertheless, all development directions and their combination do not change the fact that essential parts of our OntoFS are missing on the one hand. On the other hand we have shown our better alternatives for Ceph, Btrfs, and Betrfs, as well as Spyglass and Copernicus. For example, we substituted algorithms based on hash functions where possible for the local and distributed data storage systems, and designed data structures that combine kd-tree, Bkd-tree, and LSM-tree, as well as other data structures, algorithms, and schemes.
Our designs are creative, original and unique, very far reaching, and therefore sufficiently significant to even claim copyright for such a small development.

In addition, we counteracted that attempt to circumvent our OntoFS with for example the combination of at least Ceph, Spyglass, and Betrfs in the same way as Oracle and others did with the Btrfs in the past and are doing with the Betrfs now with our

Eventually, we consider all those attempts as

In this relation, we also remark once again that all activities have sharpened the white, yellow, or red line once again either by avoiding and circumventing our ontologic works or infringing their copyright protection.

At this point of time, we are not sure about all legal consequences but we are active to find them out.

17.February.2018
Ontonics Further steps
We worked on an older concept of a device and developed new variants of it by integrating a variant of another older concept of a device with some of our technologies. We find the resulting device and a first model very interesting and pioneering.

19.February.2018
Ontologic Web Further steps
We added a new service platform to our Ontologic Web (OW) that is pathbreaking from two point of views.

20.February.2018
Ontologic Web Further steps
We worked a little on a foundational function, so that it can be used with various Ontologic Web (OW) platforms.

Clarification
In relation with the novel and movie, that are titled "Ready Player One", and reproduce and perform an essential part of our original and unique Ontologic System (OS) as novel and movie (see also the Investigations::Multimedia of the 14th of January 2018), we reviewed a list of other novels related to the theme of simulated reality and also worked out additional evidences and details that show where more relevant elements and artistical expressions can be found in the original and unique works created by C.S..

As it is very well known, our Ontologic System and its Ontologic uniVerse or OntoVerse (OV) includes philosophy, specifically ontology theocentricism, Object-Oriented Ontology (OOO), and also existentialism and anthropocentrism, physics and the multiverse or meta-universe theory, Mediated Reality (MedR), specifically Augmented Reality (AR), Virtual Reality (VR), and Mixed Reality (MR), but also Synthetic Reality (SR), all fields of relevant simulations, and mirror world representation, as well as our Caliber/Calibre, which proves that simulated reality is also included, as can also be seen easily in the section Singularity Ontoverse of the Caliber/Calibre webpage.

So far, we have found no prior art but two more plagiarisms, and also worked out in more depth that the issue in relation with the Ready Player One novel and movie is much more substantial and serious from the legal point of view, because we do not have only the exact match in relation with the technological part and the designation with our Ontologic Collaborative Virtual Environment (OntoCOVE), Anthropocentric Sensory Immersion, and Simulation (OASIS) and Massively Multiplayer Online Game (MMOG), which accordingly is also called a virtual reality universe and virtual world by external entities, but also the close match in relation with the philosophical part with our worldview or belief system related to exisistence in general and theocentricism, Object-Oriented Ontology (OOO), and also existentialism and anthropocentrism in particular (see and compare also with christocentrism), that has been copied to some extent as well, obviously, which is an essential part of the characteristic expression of the works of art created by C.S. and characterizes them as ontologic works. If this would not be true, then there would be no reason at all to call the immersive environment, that is the main element or basis of those works, an ontological immersive environment or simulation.

We also worked out more direct relations with the subject of anthropocentrism and cybernetics.
The logo of Softbionics shows the Vitruvian Man drawn in an abstracted way in black and white with respect to dualism and the binary, specifically the

(see also the Caliber/Calibre webpage once again).

But the whole logo of SoftBionics has also to be viewed and understood in respect of monoism, specifically the

Furthermore, the Vitruvian Man is positioned in the center and the black and white rectangles meet in the center axis of the body.
The string soft in the label of SoftBionics relates to the fields of Soft Computing (SC) and software, and the subject and subfields of SoftBionics.
When taken all these graphically aspects, relations, and associations together, then this leads to a digital immersive environment and virtual reality environment, but also to the Reality-Virtuality Continuum (RVC) with Mixed Reality (MR), the field of cybernetics, and even some kind of a digital inclusion respectively digital worldview or belief system, and eventually to the insight that they are parts of a higher level (see for example the Clarification of the 16th of April 2016 once again).

The abstracted Vitruvian together with our worldview or belief system and various other aspects is repeated in the image with the title "Evidence" (see the Original of the 7th of June 2008) and many elements are repeated in the Pictures of the Day of the 5th of March 2012, where they have been put in direct relation another time.

22.February.2018
Ontonics Further steps
We noticed that a module does not need a feature and developed a new module accordingly and a new device with this new module.

We also noticed that another module could work in a different way and developed a new module accordingly. The interesting point of this solution is not its function but how this function is realized, which seems to offer additional advantages.

We also worked on a first older technology and related components, modules, and devices, that have been confirmed (once again) and improved slightly.

Furthermore, we worked on a second older technology and related components, modules, and devices, that have been been confirmed (once again) and improved slightly.

What makes these two technologies and their realizations very interesting is that they work much better than anything else available, mildly said, while remaining affordable and in this way could be very well or even will be the foundations for the next killer products besides our hover devices and some other devices.

23.February.2018
Ontonics Further steps
We reduced the complexity of an older over-engineered technology and got an interesting solution in this way.

OntoLix and OntoLinux Further steps
We have continued with connecting the dots.
For example, since the Website update and the Further steps of the 13th of February 2018 (see also the Website update and the Further steps of the 1st of February 2018) we are thinking about how the messaging technique used in the data structure of the Kdetrfs file system, the Betrfs file system, and other data storage systems based on such an approach, can be integrated and implemented in the best way with the messaging system of a Multi-Agent System (MAS) or a holonic agent system or holon, which is based on the capability-based properties of the OntoCore (OC) and included in the OntoBot (OB), as part of some kind of a MetaData Server (MDS) in for example a Peer-to-Peer (P2P) computing network, which is based on the features of the OntoNet and the OntoLedger, with the whole resulting system being controlled by the overall management of the OB.
An interesting problem is related to the backward compatibility of such a resulting system with other operating systems and distributed systems.

Another area of development and design is some kind of temporal dynamic for Content-Addressable Storage (CAS) systems in addition to the spatial dynamic already given in balanced local computing environments and distributed systems (e.g. P2P network). What we do is to utilize the functionality of the OntoBot (OB), which is based on the techniques of SoftBionics (SB), specifically Artificail Intelligence (AI), Machine Learning (ML), and Cognitive Multi-Agent System (CMAS), to manage and extend the backup and recovery system Time Engine of our Ontologic System (OS) accordingly, so that a hybrid system is realized that handles data either like a

providing maximal flexibility and customizability in contrast to an approach based on a rigid protocol predetermined by an external entity.

24.February.2018
Clarification
At first, we could not show the required causal link between a smartphone and our original and unique work of art titled Ontoscope and created by C.S., because its infrared camera for thermal vision of e.g. Geordi La Forge or Predator (see the section Human Enhancement and Cyborgs of the webpage Terms of the 21st Century on the website of OntoLinux) seemed not to be sufficient. But with the integration of a laser rangefinder or laser measuring tool as well as an electronic nose, smell sensor, odor detector and analyzer, or olfactometer (see also the Nasal Ranger and the device of the company Cyranose for example) it has become doubtlessly clear that such a mobile device is a copy of our Ontoscope, which has all kinds of sensors, specifically those that match up with the human senses, which again includes smelling, for sure, and also the related functions of another original and unique work of art titled Ontologic System, also created by C.S., and used for operating an Ontoscope.

Ontonics Further steps
From time to time we are looking at a specific physical principle that generates a lifting force. This time we looked at it in relation with our 0 Gravity 1.0 and 0 Gravity 2.0 that resulted in new designs with one of them working in an improved way. The interesting point of this technology is that it should solve or already solves a general problem and also should be very efficient, and we hope that further developments are even more interesting.

Ontonics Hoverland #8
We are pleased to announce that after the megaregions London, New York City, Berlin, Hong Kong, Milan, and Mexico City (see the Style of Speed Further steps of the 13th of May 2017), as well as Dallas and Detroit (see the Style of Speed Further steps of the 17th of May 2017) we also added the megaregions Los Angeles, Chicago, and Atlanta to our rapidly growing US Hover Association (USHA) Trans-American Network (see the issue Hoverland #3 of the 3rd of August 2017) for our aerial logistics services and personal transport services as well as mobility services based on our Hoverpods™, Hovertaxis™, Hoverbusses™, Hovertrains™, and VTOL airplanes of Style of Speed.

Other cities have been sighted for the next development steps as well already.

OntoLix and OntoLinux Website update
On the webpage of the OntoVerse software component we have corrected the statement
"It is based on the Mixed Reality (MR) spectrum respectively reality-virtuality-continuum after our definition."
with
"It is based on our Caliber/Calibre and integration of the

• Augmented Reality (AR),
• Augmented Virtuality (AV),
• Virtual Reality (VR), and
• Mixed Reality (MR),

and

Investigations::Multimedia, AI and KM

• JSON document support[...]Oracle Database supports JavaScript Object Notation (JSON) data natively with relational database features, including transactions, indexing, declarative querying, and views.[...].
• Oracle Spatial and Graph Oracle Database provides native support for managing spatial and location data [See the Ontologic File System (OntoFS) software component of our OS, specifically the section Ontologic Virtual Reality Environment of the OntoFS webpage, and also the last section of the Investigations::Multimedia of the 18th of December 2009. For sure, this similarity might not provide a convincing evidence at first sight but in a comment made to a related quote below, which also mentions the field of geometry, the connection and copying of this feature of our OntoFS becomes very obvious.]
  • Oracle Locator [...]
• Oracle XML DB,[...] or XDB,[...], provides high-performance technology for storing and retrieving native XML. [See our website Ontologics.info, where you can find many domain-specific languages defined with the eXtensible Markup Language (XML), and the section Semantic (World Wide) Web of the webpage Links to Software.]
• Oracle Text[...]. It provides native support for managing free text, in multiple languages inside the database. [This is related to the Ontologic Multilingual Multimodal Multiparadigmatic Multimedia Programming technique respectively the Ontologic programming paradigm.]
• Oracle Multimedia (known as "Oracle interMedia" before Oracle 11g) for storing and integrating multimedia data within a database[...] [This is also related to the Ontologic Multilingual Multimodal Multiparadigmatic Multimedia Programming technique respectively the Ontologic programming paradigm and when taken together with the support for managing free text in multiple languages this provides us the next evidence for the alleged infringement of our copyright and other rights.]
• Object-relational database[...] support, [...]. It provides native support for objects inside the database. [See once again the OntoBase and OntoFS software components of our OS, specifically the sections File System and Ontologic File System of the OntoFS webpage. Also note that the Oracle database is commonly referred to as Oracle RDBMS, which stands for Relational DataBase Management System (RDBMS), but only after we presented our OS it also got the featurea of multi-model and object-relational support of our OntoBase and OntoFS, which from our point of view is the next clear evidence that already proves the copyright infringement when taken alone, because this special integration of several paradigms is more than an ordinary technological progress.]",

"Oracle Spatial and Graph[...] includes network data model and RDF/OWL Semantic graphs. [See the webpage Introduction and once again the section Semantic (World Wide) Web of the webpage Links to Software of the website of OntoLinux to find the general relation with the semantic (world wide) web, and once again the section Network Technology of the of the webpage Links to Software as well as the OntoFS. See also the Comment of the Day and the Announcement of the 18th of October 2007. At this point the infringements of our rights are undeniable, but there are even more clear evidences.]",
"The geospatial feature of Oracle Spatial and Graph provides a SQL schema and functions that facilitate the storage, retrieval, update, and query of collections of spatial features in an Oracle database. (The spatial component of a spatial feature consists of the geometric representation of its shape in some coordinate space - referred to as its "geometry".) [See once again the section Ontologic Virtual Reality Environment of the OntoFS webpage and also the last subsection of the last section of the Investigations::Multimedia of the 18th of December 2009 to find out where exactly Oracle began to copy our original and unique work in an illegal way respectively where Oracle began to loot our our intellectual property. As a side effect, we can see here that our OntoFS also provides the k-dimensional binary search tree (k-d tree or kd-tree) data structure.]",
"The Network Data Model feature is a property graph model used to model and analyze physical and logical networks used in industries such as transportation, logistics, and utilities. [See the OntoBot (OB) software component with Maude and Pathway Logic of our OS and the Virtual Object System (VOS) related to the field of Cyber-Physical Systems (CPS), and find out that the Network Data Model is only a substitute for the graph-based foundation of the OWL and could be used in other fields as well, but does not avoid a causal link with our OS, specifically the OntoFS. At this point, we also have the evidence that an essential part of our Ontologic System Architecture (OSA) has been copied.] Its features include:

• Persistent management of the network connectivity in the databases. [See once again the OntoFS.]
• A data model for representing capabilities or objects (modeled as nodes and links) in a network with a [Procedural Language/Structured Query Language (]PL/SQL[) Application Programming Interface (]API[)] for managing network data. [See once again the RDF and the OWL in relation with the OntoFS for example and do not confuse with capability-based (object-oriented) operating systems though the database could be used as part of our OS in this specific case as well, which also proves the looting of our original and unique work, and correspondingly the infringement of our copyright and other rights once again.]
• User-determined link and node properties, such as costs and restrictions, including temporal properties. [See once again the RDF and the OWL for example.]
• Association of real world objects with network elements to simplify application development and maintenance. [See once again the VOS and Cyber-Physical Systems (CPS), but also the Caliber/Calibre of our OS.]
• [...]"

and
"RDF semantic

• An RDF triple store and ontology management with automatic partit[i]oning and data compression. [See once again the section Based on Ontology of the OntoBase webpage, and the sections File System and Ontologic File System of the OntoFS webpage.]
• [...]
• SPARQL and SQL parallel querying and updating of RDF graphs with SPARQL 1.1, SPARQL endpoint web services, SPARQL/Update, Java APIs with open source Apache Jena & Sesame, SQL queries with embedded SPARQL graph patterns, SQL insert/update. [See once again the sections File System and Ontologic File System of the OntoFS webpage, the webpage Introduction, and the section Semantic (World Wide) Web of the webpage Links to Software.]
• Ontology-assisted querying of table data using SQL operators to expand SQL relational queries with related terms for more comprehensive results. [See once again the OntoFS and the section Semantic (World Wide) Web of the webpage Links to Software, and also the OntoBot (OB) software component and the section Integrating Architecture of the webpage Overview of the website of OntoLinux. In this relation, it does not matter that an ontology is only utilized for supporting SQL operations, because on the one hand we learned above that the Oracle RDBMS is able to store ontologies in RDF and OWL, including those ontologies utilized for the SQL operations, and to provide "SPARQL and SQL parallel querying and updating of RDF graphs", and on the other hand the integration of the relational paradigm with the Ontology-Oriented (OO 2) paradigm, and also the integration of the Ontology-Oriented (OO 1) paradigm and the relational paradigm as the Object-Relational (OR) paradigm with the Ontology-Oriented (OO 2) paradigm, which all are also included in the Ontologic Multilingual Multimodal Multiparadigmatic Multimedia Programming technique respectively the Ontologic-(Oriented) (OO 3) paradigm with its high level of integration, which again is one of the typical characteristic expressions of C.S. represented with our iconic OS, and which all are further original and unique, and therefore copyright protected features of our OntoBase and OntoFS. This point also proves once again that even our Ontologic System Architecture (OSA) has been copied, because all essential features for realizing an OS are in place.]
• Native inferencing with parallel, incremental and secure operation for scalable reasoning with RDFS, Web Ontology Language (OWL 2 RL/EL), Simple Knowledge Organization System (SKOS), user-defined rules, user-defined inference extensions, and an extensibility framework to plug-in special purpose reasoners, such as PelletDB, TrOWL. [See once again the OntoFS and OntoBot (OB), the section Semantic (World Wide) Web of the webpage Links to Software, the section Integrating Architecture of the webpage Overview, and the first subsection of the last section of the Investigations::Multimedia of the 18th of December 2009, and also the section Formal Verification of the webpage Links to Software. This is the next undeniable evidence that our OS with its OSA and Ontologic System Components (OSC) has been copied to a larger extent. That is definitely not the way it works.]
• [...]
• RDF views on relational data to apply semantic analysis with support for automatic (Direct Mapping) and custom (W3C R2RML language) mapping of relational data to RDF triples. [See once again the section Basic Properties of the webpage Overview and the OntoFS and OntoBot, as well as the comments made to the related quotes.]
• Triple-level security that meets the most stringent security requirements with Oracle Label Security. [See once again the webpage Overview and also the OntoCore (OC) software component based on our capability-based operating system microkernel or software components OntoL4 and OntoS1, and also note that our OSA integrates all in one, which also comprised in the beginning the set of Linux kernel modifications and user space tools Security-Enhanced Linux (SELinux). Here we learn that also the aspect of trustworthiness has been copied.]
• Integration with open source Apache Jena and Sesame application development environments. [See once again the OntoFS to find the connection with Jena for example. In this relation, we have to recall once again that such a connection with an open source software infringes our copyright and potentially other rights as well.]
• Integration with XML-based tools, such as Oracle Business Intelligence Enterprise Edition (OBIEE) for reporting and dashboards. [See once again the Ontologics.info website and the OntoBot, which is integrated with the OntoBase and OntoFS by the Ontologic System Architecture (OSA), and also the section Symbolic Artificial Intelligence (AI 1) of the webpage Literature of the website of OntoLinux.]
• Integration with Network Data Model graph analytics for shortest path, nearest neighbors, within cost, and reachability. [Obviously, this also resembles the graph-based foundations of OntoFS.]
• Integration with Oracle Advanced Analytics features: Oracle Data Mining for exploiting predictive analytics and pattern discovery and Oracle R Enterprise for statistical computing and charting visualization of graph data. [See once again the OntoBot and also the webpage Ontologic Applications, the OntoScope software component, and the section Visualization of the webpage Links to Software. Needless to mention, that the OntoScope is integrated with the OntoBot, OntoBase, and OntoFS by the OSA as well, as we have explained many times in the last decade. This is just another evidence for the infringemens of our copyright and other rights.]
• Semantic indexing for text mining and entity analytics integrated with popular natural language processors. [See the Feature-Lists and the section Natural Language Processing of the webpage Links to Software. As we said before, Oracle has looted our OS.]
• Integration with leading commercial and open source tools for querying, visualization, and ontology management. [See once again the webpage Introduction, the section Basic Properties of the webpage Overview, the OntoBot and OntoScope, the sections Semantic (World Wide) Web and Visualization of the webpage Links to Software, and also note once again that such integrations also constitute infringements of our rights.]".

We can also see the feature of automatic storage management, the Oracle Autonomous Database, the Oracle Cloud as a Service (aaS), and other similarities with our ontologic works.

Obviously, many of these listed features taken alone, most of these features in combination with one or more of the other listed features, and all features in combination are a part of our OS, specifically a part of our OntoBase, OntoFS, OntoBot, and OntoScope, their integration in accordance with our Ontologic System Architecture (OSA), as well as Ontologic Applications (OA) and Ontologic Net (ON), Ontologic Web (OW), and Ontologic uniVerse (OV) Services (OAOOOS).

The iconic works of art including ideas and concepts as well as compositions realized by C.S. as representations of the

and the related achievements and economic accomplishments of our corporation are not for free. Any reproduction and performance of the ontologic works in whole or in part always yields in an infringement of our copyright (e.g. misleading of the public about the true origin of these works) or/and infringements of our other rights (e.g. various acts of unfair business practice).
Learn to understand that patenting is not always required to protect a work of an artist, specifically when the artist has created such outstanding works or/and a technology or a media is only the means for their realizations (see also the Clarification #1 of the 3rd of November 2017).

25.February.2018
Ontonics Further steps
We suddenly recognized that we have forgotten to improve additional elements of a system, which hase been made up now.

OntoLix and OntoLinux Website update
In the section Based on Ontology of the webpage of the OntoBase software component we corrected the statement
"which is based on the Artifical Intelligence (AI) capabilities of our OntoBot, as well as the Machine Learning (ML) functionalities of our OntoBlender"
with
"which is based on the SoftBionic (SB) functionalities of our OntoBot and our OntoBlender, comprising Artifical Intelligence (AI) and Machine Learning (ML) capabilities for example".

And while we were already there, we added

at the appropriate place (see also the Website update of the 12th of February 2018).

26.February.2018
Ontonics Further steps
We have improved a technology and related components, modules, and devices by integrating a feature of another newer technology of us. This is once again a technology that is getting better and better even in its basic but also in its improved variants. Very cool and exciting.

27.February.2018
Investigations::Multimedia, AI and KM

• Troll Corey Richardson: "I feel like it makes sense to bootload some little stub that sets up seL4 as the only enclave in the system. I don't see any reason to have multiple enclaves when using seL4. But, from this, it should be possible to get a good static root of trust remote attestation on Google Cloud."
• Ringleader Gernot Heiser in response to Corey Richardson: "Running seL4 as the trusted base on [Software Guard Extensions (]SGX[)] would be nice. Unfortunately, SGX has a major shortcoming (which I told the Intel folks as soon as I saw it first): SG[X] enclaves run in Ring 3. Which means there is no protection inside an enclave, you have to trust everything in there, and consequently seL4 is of no help at all. [Guess why and then see our clarification below.]"
• Troll Tony Arcieri in response to Gernot Heiser: "I think it'd be fantastic to use seL4 as a sort of "enclave hypervisor", where enclave(s) can make OCALLs to seL4 to access (from the enclave's perspective) untrusted services, e.g. speaking to networks or interacting with filesystems.
  If an enclave can OCALL out to communicate to the network, trust can be established by terminating a cryptographically secure channel protocol (e.g. TLS, Noise) inside of the enclave. Filesystem access can be similarly secured by only storing cryptographically authenticated data, e.g. files encrypted with an [Authenticated Encryption with Associated Data (]AEAD[)] scheme with keys held inside the enclave.
  I think it'd be very neat to use seL4 in this way: running one or more enclaves, and potentially some (untrusted from SGX's perspective) userspace services that e.g. provide a web UI or other functionality that doesn't need access to enclave facilities/secrets.
  You'd need to effectively reimplement the whole SGX RTS to accomplish this [...]."
• Samuel Weiser in response to Corey Richardson: "As Gernot mentioned, enclaves run in ring 3. There's currently no possibility to implement something like kernel enclaves with SGX. To be slightly off-topic: Instead of trying to run seL4 inside SGX, one can think the other way round and use seL4 to augment SGX enclaves with trusted platform services [...]."

Referenced is a work of S. Weiser and another plagiarist who wrote the following: "[...] Intel introduced SGX, which allows to protect application code against a subverted or malicious OS by running it in a hardware-protected enclave. However, SGX lacks support for generic trusted I/O paths to protect user input and output between enclaves and I/O devices. This work presents SGXIO, a generic trusted path architecture for SGX, allowing user applications to run securely on top of an untrusted OS, while at the same time supporting trusted paths to generic I/O devices. To achieve this, SGXIO combines the benefits of SGX's easy programming model with traditional hypervisor-based trusted path architectures."

What we see here from the technical point of view is an essential part respectively foundation of our OntoCore software component of our original and unique OS, because conceptually the isolated (virtualized) containers or enclaves of e.g. SGX are nothing else than the private address spaces, isolated memory spaces, isolated system (service) domains, protection domains, meta spaces, or sandboxes, Software Isolated Processes (SIPs), and so on of a capability-based operating system, hypervisor, or/and Multi-Agent System (MAS), and in such a system a generic trusted I/O path or cryptographically secured channel is nothing else than a validatable, verifiable, validated, or/and verified communication technique for the Inter-Process Communication (IPC) and the transportation of messages or other informations between two or more isolated memory spaces, domains, or processes, respectively system services or agents, that is all included in our OntoCore (see also the section of the webpage Components, the sections Basic Properties and Integrating Architecture of the webpage Overview, and the operating systems referenced and listed years ago in the section Exotic Operating System of the webpage Links to Software of the website of OntoLinux and the message Ontologics OntoLix officially started of the 9th of November 2014).
We recommend to take our Ontologic System Architecture (OSA) and the Ontologic System Components (OSC), and combine for example the formally verified and capability-based OntoL4 microkernel and L4OntoLinux (keyword trusted hypervisor) with the features of the listed (exotic) operating systems and their security-oriented variants (e.g. Flask security-enhanced version of the Fluke kernel of the Flux project with Multi-Level Security (MLS), Security IDentifier (SID), Security Union Directory (SUD), and Security Union Port Space (SUP) similar to Authenticated Encryption with Associated Data (AEAD), Kernel-Less Operating System (KLOS) with hardware-based virtualized resources, SPACE with hardware-based (protection for) cross-domain calls, and also our SASOS4Fun with SIPs), and an MAS (see also the Cognac system based on Apertos with meta spaces and note that the OS basic property of (mostly) being kernel-less reflective/fractal/holonic implies that all variants inclusive L4 on OntoLinux as well and not only OntoLinux on L4 are included by such compositions).

At this point, we would also like to give the reminder that on the one hand our SASOS4Fun and its listing in the section Exotic Operating System was a little trick of us to introduce the technique of SIPs without referencing the operating system Singularity with its other two key architectural features based on basic properties of our OS of (mostly) being validated and verified as well as its optional hardware-based protection or isolation around SIP (see also the point Singularity on the OntoCore webpage) and on the other hand SIPs can also be layered into multiple address spaces for example.
The deveopers of Systems Programming using Address-spaces and Capabilities for Extensibility (SPACE) made clear that "[u]ltimately, the kernel is the hardware" and we also made clear that features of our OS can be realized in hardware, which is what the company Intel did with SGX by implementing an essential part of the combination of a verified microkernel and the operating systems SPACE and Singularity and the technique of Software Isolated Processes (SIPs) transformed into hardware, microcode, and Hardware Isolated Processes (HIPs) as far as possible, while avoiding that a causal link with our OS could be proven by us.

What we see here from the legal point of view is that the maling list has been misused once again to infringe our copyright and other rights by misleading the public about the true origin of our works, and that the representative of the center with a highly questionable excellence does not clarify the situation but instead provides constructive informations in support of those activities. The latter was also the reason for publicating this issue as an investigation.
Obviously, the technical point of view shows that the legal problem already begins before adding a trusted path, cryptographically secured channel, validatable, verifiable, validated, or/and verified messages, or/and similar secure communication approaches, and therefore all those proposals, scientific works, and implementations constitute a copyright infringement.
Simply said, we had two directions of development until around the year 2000: One was the direction of the capability-based os and the other one was the direction of the isolation-based os. Then entities of both directions saw, or better said spied out, our activities with the results that the capability-based os approach was thought to be enhanced with a verified microkernel, while the isolation-based os approach was thought to be enhanced with a messaging framework based on validation or verification or both. But we saw all the time that the capability-based os approach remains inflexible due to the management and dependance of the capabilities and the isolation-based os approach remains incomplete of a verified base in this way, and also that both approaches had various other significant deficits such as the missing features of the other direction, (trusted) hypervisor and Virtual Machine (VM) technologies, distributed computing, actor-based, and agent-based paradigms and systems, etc., and about adding SoftBionics (SB) with Artificial Intelligence (AI), Machine Learning (ML), and Cognitive Multi-Agent System (CMAS), as well as Ontologics we do not even need to talk about here.
Now, everybody wants our OntoCore in whole or in part, but even if there might be a very small legal loophole with what is discussed in the quoted emails and pseudo scientific paper, which we cannot see in contrast to only reinventions of our wheel, or the next clever entity comes up with another prior art then all the rest of our OS (e.g. composition of a formally verified microkernel, isolation, validatable, verifiable, validating, verifying, validated, or/and verified communication system, MAS, CMAS, and so on) is missing, as usual, which eventually would make such an actually not existing loophole an island system. In the end, that ship sailed a long time ago.