• Swarm Computing (SC) or Swarm Intelligence (SI) and
• Evolutionary Computing (EC), including
  • Genetic Pogramming (GP),

and

we are aware of all those problems in general since decades.

We are looking in our stocks for something that might be more tricky than a cunning virus when testing it.
We also already have found something, which helps with testing at home, if still required.

02.April.2020

Comment of the Day

CoronaCola™
Corona Bock™

Ontonics Further steps

We are looking at

which contain SARS CoronaVirus (SARS-CoV) antigens. Yeah.

Maybe a new butter, ketchup, cookies, tea, and potato on this basis would be fine as well.
No joke. :D

16:55 UTC+2
SOPR #279

*** Work in progress ***
Topics
In this issue we summarize more opinions, comments, activities, etc. in relation to the following topics:

Legal matter
We are trying to find the right balance between dos and don'ts (what is not modified and exclusive and what is modified and inclusive and what is licensable) as part of our Quality Management (QM) system.

At this point, we have the feeling to give the reminder

• legal matter in general and
• regulations of the societal compromise, social contract respectively the Articles of Association (AoA) and the Terms of Service (ToS) of our manging and collecting Society for Ontological Performance and Reproduction (SOPR), as well as out-of-court agreement, support agreement for national industries, and non-aggression agreement for our corporation, also referred to collectively as Big Deal, in particular.

We are demanding, asserting, and protecting our rights worldwide.

License Model (LM)
As we noted on the 30th of March 2020,

is

for any entity.

A thorough analysis of government processes proved exactly this for the SOPR membership of states once again, which even holds true in case of higher royalties.
We never claimed something else.

Digital rights [Social and Societal]
The debate about an illegal warning app was obselete all the time and is over already, and therefore we are wondering why some persons still continue with that. We recalled and said virtually everything about the so-called Corona-App since the 13th of March 2020 in the Investigations::Multimedia, AI and KM of the 13th of March 2020 and the issues SOPR #276 of the 19th of March 2020, SOPR #277 of the 28th of March 2020, and SOPR #278 of the 30th of March 2020.

The legal and technical matters have been solved since years.
It does not matter if politicians, data protectionists, and consumer advisors still want more, because we have rights as well and act in compliance with the laws, regulations, and acts, as well as agreements.
Furthermore, C.S. does not allow a different modification of the overall Ontologic System than the modification already done without any reason to fulfill the rights and demands of the worldwide societies.

Moreover, end entities have to sign the Articles of Association (AoA) and the Terms of Service (ToS) with the License Model (LM) of our Society for Ontological Performance and Reproduction (SOPR) anyway.
If an entity implements a Distributed System (DS) on the basis of

then this does not change our rights and demand on the raw signals and data. We get them anyway.
If a related clause is fulfilled in the case of a Personally Identifiable Informations (PII), then we get this information as well.
In this regard, we have to note that the clauses

• 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

only apply if the PII is used externally, for example shared with the other members of the SOPR or the public, but not if it is used by the OSystem core, the administration core, and the subsystems and platforms of our SOPR and our Ontologic Net (ON), Ontologic Web (OW), and Ontologic uniVerse (OV) internally.

Nobody is conditioned by isolation to accept a decrease of freedom, foundational rights, and democracy.
For sure, we do not condition anybody to become a member of our Society for Ontological Performance and Reproduction (SOPR), and use a

The flaw of all those conspiracy theories is that C.S. created the OS in the 2000s, for example as a means to protect freedom and democracy against the misuse of technology, specifically Artificial Intelligence (AI) and Machine Learning (ML), and for many other reasons, and publicated it in the autumn of 2006.
In this context, we have also already said in May 2018 that we had the principles and values of fundamental freedoms, human rights, democracy, and rule of law in mind and the constitutions of democratic states with modern and free societies where the guiding blueprints when creating the AoA and the ToS of our SOPR.
The fact is that nothing comes together by a New World Order (NWO) agenda. It is merely the implementation of the OS, that integrates all in one and constitutes one artwork.

There is definitely no need to fear a decrease of freedom and a danger for democracy. Quite the contrary is the case: Digital freedom, digital rights, digital properties, and digital democracy, and therefore their real counterparts as well are protected and even increased.

Last but not least, we will not throw all the potentials and synergetic effects of our SOPR away, only because some entities are just plain incompetent regarding social, legal, technological, and economical matter. Most of the basic stuff is from the late 1990s and early 2000s, though their new generations and integrations came from us.

"The approach of [C.S. with the OS and] our SOPR is much more superior in comparison with every other solution we have seen so far."
Our OS is a true masterpiece in this regard as well. OS is designed for viruses and much more

Further steps
We might begin with installing and operating our related platform, application, and service of the exclusive infrastructure of our SOPR in the next future worldwide, if sufficiently many entities sign our agreement, which we think is the right and only way to proceed in all respects. But we only need one larger partner and there are at least two large companies that will collaborate with us, because not collaborating with us is like loosing money or market share, or ... doing stupid.

We worked through a huge pile of opinions about the so-called Corona-apps.
Results:

But our SOPR is the exception, because it provides tracking and tracing without

For sure, there exist Internet of Things (IoT) technologies and Robotic Systems (RSs) based on Personal Area Network (PAN) technology (e.g. Bluetooth) for the management of rendezvous between devices and mesh networks. But so far we are not aware of a prior art, specifially a software application based on PAN, and Swarm Computing (SC) or Swarm Intelligence (SI) respectively Ontologic Applications and Ontologic Services (OAOS).
In addition, a legal loophole is only given when said application is not operated on a device based on our Ontologic System Components (OSC) and our Ontoscope Components (OsC).

This also leads to the issue of mass surveillance, cyber sovereingty, and so on.

At the end, we would like to point out that in the moment our SOPR provides a platform, application, and service the exemption permit is void and all federal and private platforms, applications, and services have to be replaced with the ones of the SOPR (see once again the issue SOPR #276 of the 19th of March 2020), which will be done by the providers of the systems based on our OSC in the case a government or federal institute refuses to comply with the AoA and the ToS of our SOPR.
There are no turf war and no trial of strength, because C.S. has decided to act in the related ways in the early 2000s already when creating the Ontologic System.

Digital rights [Mixed Reality (MR)]
We concluded that Mixed Reality (MR) technologies, applications, and services have the same privacy issues like tracking and tracing.
Therefore, our SOPR is the only legal solution in this field as well, as is the case for other fields.

04.April.2020

Ontonics, OntoLix and OntoLinux Further steps

Our original and unique, iconic work of art titled Ontologic System and created by C.S. is a very complex masterpiece.
Some basic properties and component features, that we have always mentioned implicitly and explicitly, include

• capability-based operating system,

• Distributed Ledger Technology (DLT) based on directed graphs (e.g. Directed Acyclic Graph (DAG)), cryptographically chained or interlinked data structures (e.g. hash chain and hash tree (Merkle tree)), and cyptographically chained or interlinked blocks or records (e.g. blockchain technique) of us (used illegally for Bitcoin, Ethereum, etc.), and
• universal ledger, and
• quantum ledger,

• type 1, also known as native or bare metal hypervisor for full or native virtualization,
• type 2, also known as hosted hypervisor for paravirtualization, and
• type 3, also known as os-level hypervisor or virtualizer for operating system-level (os-level) virtualization or containerization

• Peer-to-Peer (P2P) computing,
• Grid, Cloud, Edge, and Fog Computing (GCEFC), and
• Fault-Tolerant, Reliable, and Distributed System (FTRDS),
  • Byzantine Fault Tolerance (BFT), also called interactive consistency and Byzantine agreement,
  • reflective, Fault-Tolerant, Reliable, and Distributed operating system (FTRDos) (e.g. Apertos (Muse) and Cognac based on Apertos),
  • Fault-Tolerant, Reliable, and Trustworthy Distributed System (FTRTDS), including
    • DLT,
  • secure state machine replication based on atomic broadcast (e.g. Secure INtrusion-Tolerant Replication Architecture (SINTRA)) (see also the Peer-to-Peer (P2P) Virtual Machine (VM) Askemos based on Evoos)

as can be seen for example in the Further steps of the 2nd of May 2016 and the OntoLix and OntoLinux Website update of the same day referenced therein, the OntoLix and OntoLinux Further steps or Clarification of the 24th of April 2018, the Investigations::Multimedia of the 20th of October 2017, specifically its summary, and the Clarification of the 11th of May 2018, as well as the messages, notes, explanations, and clarifications referenced in them.

This also works with sound, light (e.g. video), and so on.

This allows us to

• Digital IDentity (DID),
• digital health record,
• location data and movement profile, and
• digital wallet,

alone, synchronized, and integrated, and also secured with a digital ledger directly in the OSystem core and the administration core of the infrastructure of our SOPR, and our ON, OW, and OV, if and as required.

This also works in all configurations and utilizations with the support of all the many other basic properties and component features, like

• statistical learning and analysis,
• data mining,
• Big Data Fusion (BDF),
• Big Data Processing (BDP), and
• Big Data Analytics (BDA),

even done on the basis of the integration of GCEFC and SB, or correctly said on the basis of our ON and OW,

Indeed, this is just another of the many ridiculous and crazy ideas, concepts, expressions, and technologies, that are now becoming a reality due to our Ontologic System and show why it is original and unqiue, and therefore enjoys worldwide copyright protection.

06.April.2020

21:36 UTC+2
SOPR #280

*** Work in progress - better wording, maybe some corrections ***
Topics
We are considering the next issue of our SOPR summarizing opinions, comments, activities, etc. of the last days in relation to this issue's topics:

Legal matter [Fifth column of power]
A protection against other entities by the constitution is required for our SOPR, like it is done for the so-called free press.

Legal matter [Emergency agreement]
To accelerate activities we are working on an emergency agreement, which would

Digital rights [Social and Societal]
The European data protection supervisor said the European Union's main privacy law, the General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR), allows the processing of sensitive private information, when it is in the interest of public health.

Obviously, our Society for Ontological Performance and Reproduction (SOPR) has all legal rights as the only entity, as we always explained.
There is even no need for special configurations of the infrastructure of our SOPR at least in the European Union (EU), because our clauses about the duties of a member are in compliance with the GDPR anyway.

SOPR infrastructure
Since some days, we are already focusing on our initial approach again that is the realization of the infrastructure of our SOPR.

For sure, we thought around a week about the risk to discuss our infrastructure of our SOPR and publicate the Ontonics, OntoLix and OntoLinux Further steps of the 4th of April 2020 for only being disappointed once again and as usual. But we only recalled matter that has been publicated years ago.

Too many decision makers have made too many bad decisions, when they merely reacted on what others do or say respectively just doing politics and lobbyism. Now the ball is rolling.

We still observe unwanted activities of governments, commissions, organizations, and other entities. This is particularly disappointing, because

Even the World Health Organization (WHO) joined in with the suggestion of a health architecture ... and closing ranks with (members of) the European Commission (EC) in relation to a European Corona-app and even a worldwide effort. Both merely stealing our AW and other IPs, and mimicking our SOPR, damaging the goals and even threatening the integrity of our SOPR.

Although not surprising and proving that we were right all the time to take preparation to fight back, it is still extremely disgusting.

In relation to the infringement of privacy the European data protection supervisor is not quite right but even erring a little, because we do have our rights as well and therefore our SOPR

as long as the national and international laws, regulations, and acts, as well as agreements are not infringed.

Interested entities do not have to talk with the WHO, the EC, or the industries, but with our SOPR.

OAOS
We have the opinion that it is time to kill another myth related to our Ontologic System (OS).
We clearly said that we will acount any performance of our Ontologic Applications and Ontologic Services (OAOS) and bill any use of our digital properties even if a crisis is taking place or an exemption permit might be in place.

According to our common procedure in such cases, parts of the infrastructure and the subsystems and platforms realized by other entities without allowance

when we start the related system or platform of our SOPR.
We hope that our properties have been returned and the takeover objects have signed either the agreement or the emergency agreement.

And es not expected otherwise it is now a European Corona-app: "The German [Corona-]app should be compatible with software applications in other European countries and be available for download in the next days or weeks."
We assume that software applications means other Corona-apps or otherwise we will view the holding back of precise informations as an evidence for exploiting our reputation and goodwill a further time.
Please remember that without broad testing Corona-apps are of little or even no value.
In addition, they will not work very well in urban areas with high population density, because only one infected person can be in the proximity of thousand other persons and trigger a warning for all of them, specifically in relation to key workers and health workers.
And even with broad testing the procedure must work in minutes but not in hours and days until a warning is sent.
And even more worse there is no reliable testing (around 45 to 60% reliability), which is the reason why we said testing must be done all the time and multiple times to increase the reliability of the overall testing procedure. But the latter requires billions of test kits, which costs a lot.

07.April.2020

16:09, 17:31, and 19:49 UTC+2
Investigations::Multimedia, AI and KM

*** Work in progress - some more order ***
Government of the F.R.Germany→Robert Koch-Institut
Today, we learned that the federal agency Robert Koch-Institut also developed a second application in relation to the SARS-CoV-2 behind our back, which is prohibited by the Articles of Association (AoA) and the Terms of Service (ToS) of our managing and collecting Society for Ontological Performance and Reproduction (SOPR) and which is a so-called Corona-data-donation-app and not the Corona-app based on Personal Area Network (PAN) technology (e.g. Bluetooth) for tracking and tracing, and discussed in the media all the time.
We took a look at the website of said second Corona-app and found the devil in some details, as not expected otherwise: "[...]
To share their data, users must connect their fitness wristband and smartwatch accounts to the Corona-data-donation-app. [...]
How it works
For the Corona-data-donation-app a smartphone and a fitness wristband or a smartwatch are required. With these so-called wearables we can detect symptoms of a corona virus infection at an early stage and record its geographical spread.
President Robert Koch-Institut
"Digital applications can usefully supplement the existing measures to contain COVID-19. We hope that many people will participate. Because the more people make their data available for evaluation, the more accurate our findings on the spread of the coronavirus will become."
[A first scientist]
Modelling of complex systems [] HU [...]
"Your data donation enables us to better understand the spread of the coronavirus and to drastically reduce the number of undetected cases of infected persons. This information is incredibly valuable for epidemiologists and helps to derive better measures[.]"
[A second scientist]
Digital Health - FAU [...]
"To predict the spread and containment of COVID-19, data from worn sensors and smartphones will help us. Indicators for a virus infection from sensor data are more reliable than the manual input of disease symptoms into a smartphone."

Your questions simply answered!
You can read answers to the most frequently asked questions about the data-donation-app in the following paragraphs. You can also find more information in our FAQ.

How Corona-data-donation works?
Users send various data to the Robert Koch-Institute via an app. This includes data on activity and heart rate collected by fitness wristbands and smartwatches. Users are also asked for their postcode.
Novel algorithms can detect various symptoms in these data, which are associated with coronavirus infection, among other things. Based on scientific methods, the results are processed geographically. They can provide the scientists of the Robert Koch-Institute with additional information on the distribution of the coronavirus.

Why should I share my data?
Their data also help the Robert Koch-Institute to assess the spread of the infections. This enables the scientists to better assess the current situation and, with the help of data from fitness wristbands, to better estimate the possible number of undetected coronavirus infections.

Is the Corona-data-donation anonymous?
The use of the app is based on an individual user ID that is assigned to you personally - the so-called pseudonym. This is the only way to correctly assign and interpret data, even over longer periods of time. The app is therefore not anonymous, but pseudonymous. Nevertheless, the Robert Koch-Institut has no knowledge of your personal information (address or name) at any time.

Who is behind the Corona-data-donation?
The Corona-data-donation is published by the Robert Koch-Institut. The app was developed in collaboration with [a company other than ours], a company specializing in digital health. This company is the technology service provider.
Through careful selection and regular monitoring, the Robert Koch-Institut generally ensures that the service provider takes all organizational and technical measures necessary to protect your data. All measures are in accordance with the applicable data protection law.

What data is collected?
The following data is collected and processed by the Corona data donation app:

1. Automatically and manually recorded activities of the fitness wristband, such as for example:
   1. Sports (e.g. cycling, running)
   2. Sleep and sleep phases
   3. Being active (e.g. walking, activity)
   4. Rest periods
2. Automatically and manually recorded vital data of the fitness wristband, such as for example:
   1. Pulse
   2. Heart rate variability
   3. Stress
   4. Temperature
   5. Weight
   6. Blood pressure
3. Sociodemographic data, if previously entered by the user in the Fitness Bracelet application:
   1. Age (rounded to 5 years)
   2. Size (rounded to 5 cm)
   3. Gender
   4. Weight (rounded to 5 kg)

Gender, body and fitness bracelet data are needed to detect possible symptoms. The postal code is needed to record the spatial distribution.
These data do not allow any identification of your person.
In the table behind the link, you can clearly see which data is used and offered by which fitness wristband providers. ([hyperlink] to the table)

Does the app know if I have the coronavirus?
The app is not a test for the corona virus. It does not detect if you have COVID-19. The app detects various symptoms that are associated with an infection with the corona virus. These include an increased resting pulse (indication of fever) and altered sleep and activity patterns.
[...]

How can fitness wristbands and smartwatches detect coron symptoms?
Sensors in fitness wristbands and smartwatches provide a wealth of data that enable the detection of potential COVID-19 symptoms. A key parameter is your pulse for example, which the fitness wristbands and Smartwatches measure on your wrist. The resting pulse rate indicates how many times a person's heart beats per minute in a resting situation to supply the body with enough blood.
An average daily value for the resting pulse is determined from several measurements. If the resting pulse rate is higher than usual, fever can be suspected - fever is also a symptom of COVID-19.
Since the pulse rate also increases with activity, this is also collected to automatically cleanse the data. The activity is recorded by motion sensors of the fitness wristband or the Smartwatch.
The combination of motion sensors and pulse detection can also be used to determine sleep duration and quality. Changes in sleep behavior are also used to detect symptoms.
All these calculations are combined in a specifically developed algorithm. In a similar project in the USA during a wave of influenza, the health data of more than 100,000 people wearing fitness wristbands were measured. It was proven that data from fitness wristbands describe the spread of the flu very accurately ([hyperlink] zur Studie ["Harnessing wearable device data to improve state-level real-time surveillance of influenza-like illness in the USA: a population-based study"])."]

Comment
That app is fraud, because it has another overall goal than getting more knowledge about a specific disease. In fact, it is about one of the subsystems and platforms of our SOPR in the fields of Cyber-Physical System (CPS), Internet of Things (IoT), and Networked Embedded System (NES), specifically in the fields of

which are based

of our OS.
We also have here the user identities and accounts with pseudonyms, as already explained by us, which reflects our IDentity and Access Management System (IDAMS) to some extend besides the data sharing clause of our SOPR. This shows that our OS has been taken as source of inspiration and blueprint and this specific interpretation, realization, and implementation does not avoid a causal link with our OS.

Obviously, the F.R.German government has broken the [so-called societal compromise or out-of-court] agreement with us once again, as we have seen before with a joint venture in the field of Air Traffic Management (ATM). That other company named in the FAQ would have to be our corporation, though this platform and related applications and services belong to the infrastructure of our SOPR anyway.
In addition, manufacturers of technologies and goods (e.g. mobile devices and applications) as well as providers of service platforms and services based on our OSC and OsC have the legal obligations to

in order to respect our digital rights and digital properties.
Moveover, if an entitiy has sufficient many anonymous or pseudonymous signals and data the true identity can be easily doxxed respectively established.
In a democracy no federal agency should be allowed to have direct access to these signals and data, as well as informations, and knowledge without a court order, and with our SOPR this is even not needed at all.
As we said in the Investigations::Multimedia, AI and KM of the 13th of March 2020 and the issue SOPR #276 of the 19th of March 2020, governments and their federal agencies can rent or lease, and buy everything from our SOPR, Ontonics, and other business units of our corporation.

But there is still no word said about the broad testing required for working at all and all the other issues with the so-called Corona-apps, which we explained several times over the last week.

We also made a quick look at some of the 17 entities, that developed the so-called Corona-app based on Bluetooth together with the federal agency Robert Koch-Institut, but only to confirm that they have infringed our copyright by stealing from our original and unique, iconic work of art titled Ontologic System and created by C.S., and also infringed other rights of C.S. and our corporation, for example by misleading the public about the true origin of our works and achievements and the true legal situation.

A company
Already the first company of said group of 17 (?)130 entities, that was investigated by us, showed that our first assumption was 100% correct. We quote from its website: "Our proprietary knowledge automation engine uses advanced AI to deliver 90% automation with minimal up front configuration work. The engine combines a semantic knowledge graph and multiple AI techniques including machine learning, reinforcement learning, [Natural Language Processing (]NLP[)] and machine reasoning:

See also the Investigations::AI and Knowledge management of the 31st of December 2013, specfically the cases of the companies Sirma Group→Ontotext, Structured Dynamics, and Cycorp, which equal that fraud.

Comment
First of all, we quote an online encyclopedia about reasoning system: "In information technology a reasoning system is a software system that generates conclusions from available knowledge using logical techniques such as deduction and induction. Reasoning systems play an important role in the implementation of artificial intelligence and knowledge-based systems."
We quote an online encyclopedia about automated reasoning: "Automated reasoning is an area of cognitive science (involves knowledge representation and reasoning) and metalogic dedicated to understanding different aspects of reasoning. The study of automated reasoning helps produce computer programs that allow computers to reason completely, or nearly completely, automatically. Although automated reasoning is considered a sub-field of artificial intelligence, it also has connections with theoretical computer science, and even philosophy.
The most developed subareas of automated reasoning are automated theorem proving (and the less automated but more pragmatic subfield of interactive theorem proving) and automated proof checking (viewed as guaranteed correct reasoning under fixed assumptions)."

Furthermore, we quote an online encyclopedia about the subject automated reasoning: "(Redirected from machine reasoning)
In computer science, in particular in knowledge representation and reasoning and metalogic, the area of automated reasoning is dedicated to understanding different aspects of reasoning. The study of automated reasoning helps produce computer programs that allow computers to reason completely, or nearly completely, automatically. Although automated reasoning is considered a sub-field of artificial intelligence, it also has connections with theoretical computer science and philosophy.
The most developed subareas of that automated reasoning are automated theorem proving (and the less automated but more pragmatic subfield of interactive theorem proving) and automated proof checking (viewed as guaranteed correct reasoning under fixed assumptions"

Obviously,

Therefore, that proprietary knowledge automation engine

Quod Erat demonstrandum (QED)==Which was to be proven. Or simply: Convicted!!!

For all those clever (not really) entities we have publiated our Clarifications related to the copyright and other rights and properties, like for example the Clarification of the 11th of March 2020, which applies in this investigate case.

But the scandal is rising with every day. At first, we were told that only the federal agency with another institute and some other actors (around 12 in sum) were developing the Corona-app variant of the F.R.Germany. Then there was the Deutsche Telekom and other mobile Communications Service Providers (CSPs), the European Commission (EC), and suddenly 130 entities, the World Health Organization (WHO), and once again the EC now together with the WHO.
We also learned that activities have begun much earlier behind our back suggesting a deliberately conducted exploitation of our reputation and goodwill, and betrayal.

We have also made the same observations with other projects of this and other governments, that shows that such activities are deliberately planned and orchestrated serious criminal conspiracies.
Besides the company Microsoft, we also learned that two dubious companies were taking part in the development of a crisis response information and management system based on our OS wondering why the two other take part at all.

We also observed that the Corona-app of the U.K. is suddenly the variant of the F.R.Germany "App uses Bluetooth to trace contacts within certain limits, eg closer than 2m for more than 15 minutes", but not the variant of for example the P.R.China, South Korea, and Singapore "App tracks location and QR code".

By the way, a gatecrash by a mass does not work, even not when it is supported by governments and commissions. For example, The hundreds or thousands of providers and the hundreds of thousands or even millions of users of illegal Peer-to-Peer (P2P) file sharing platforms were catched within some few years and then all paid massive damages.
Here we even have a conspiracy with the usual serious criminal ring leaders.

All these dubious activities are exactly the wrong things to provide trust and other constructive things. But as we already noted, it is not about having success, but protection the own position in institutions and organizations without having own ideas and concepts, and competences.
So much about solidarity.

Talking with the hand is more effective.

08.April.2020

09.April.2020

10.April.2020

06:22, 09:37, and 20:45 UTC+2
Ontonics Further steps

Last week, we have already layed our investment programs and deals, which go beyond the matter related to our Society for Ontological Performance and Reproduction (SOPR), on ice for an indefinite time.
In this actual situation, communicating our plans to the public makes no sense and is just only a waste of time, because they will only be copied, corrupted, or thwarted otherwise.

Instead, we are also focusing more on our

in case the national societal compromise, social contract respectively Articles of Association (AoA), as well as out-of-court agreement, support agreement for national industries, and non-aggression agreement for our corporation, also referred to collectively as Big Deal, being in preparation is not convincing somehow, so that we can act accordingly without wasting more time.

22:36, 23:41, and 24:12 UTC+2
Investigations::Multimedia, AI and KM

Massachusetts Institute of Technology
...

Apple and Google
We found out that Apple and Google are also working on an illegal Corona-app.
At first, we quote a related message from the website of the company Apple:
"Apple and Google partner on COVID-19 contact tracing technology
[...]
In this spirit of collaboration, Google and Apple are announcing a joint effort to enable the use of Bluetooth technology to help governments and health agencies reduce the spread of the virus, with user privacy and security central to the design.
[...]
To further this cause, Apple and Google will be launching a comprehensive solution that includes application programming interfaces (APIs) and operating system-level technology to assist in enabling contact tracing. Given the urgent need, the plan is to implement this solution in two steps while maintaining strong protections around user privacy.
First, in May, both companies will release APIs that enable interoperability between Android and iOS devices using apps from public health authorities. These official apps will be available for users to download via their respective app stores.
Second, in the coming months, Apple and Google will work to enable a broader Bluetooth-based contact tracing platform by building this functionality into the underlying platforms. This is a more robust solution than an API and would allow more individuals to participate, if they choose to opt in, as well as enable interaction with a broader ecosystem of apps and government health authorities. Privacy, transparency, and consent are of utmost importance in this effort, and we look forward to building this functionality in consultation with interested stakeholders."

We would like to clearify some misconceptions and misinformations:

• Investigations::Multimedia, AI and KM of the 13th of March 2020
• Corona-app based only on Bluetooth will not work of the 2nd of April 2020
• Latest about Corona apps of the 2nd of April 2020
• Ontonics, OntoLix and OntoLinux Further steps4th of April 2020
• Investigations::Multimedia, AI and KM7th of April 2020
• SOPR withdraw exemption permit due to fraud 7th of April 2020
• I have to pee, once again of the 8th of April 2020
• Data donation with OS and Os illegal of the 9th of April 2020
• Corona-apps not needed with herd immunity of the 9th of April 2020
• Temporary and not otherwise possible of today above

We quote their technical document titled Contact Tracing [] Bluetooth Specification:

Privacy
Maintaining user privacy is an essential requirement in the design of this specification. The protocol does this by the following means:

Basically, it is an improved variant of the European virus application in compliance with a requirement of a computer club (see requirement 7. Anonymity in the note I have to pee, once again of the 8th of April 2020). But this does not avoid the utilization of the systems based on our OSC and called Android and iOS and our Ontologic Applications and Ontologic Services (OAOS).

But more importantly, it still has all the deficits, which the infrastructure and the subsystems and platforms of our SOPR and our Ontologic Net (ON), Ontologic Web (OW), and Ontologic uniVerse (OV) do not have. They are becoming the standard anyway, because

We also recall, that we get the raw signals and data anyway, or otherwise companies get no allowance to perform and reproduce our OS, inclusive our Os and our OAOS.
The same holds for the duties of a member of our SOPR, who has to provide specific raw signals and data, informations, and knowledge for sharing with the other members of our SOPR as part of the digital democracy.
By the way: We do have the fields of Cyber-Physical System (CPS), Internet of Things (IoT), and Networked Embedded System (NES) integrated in our OS and therefore beacons based on Personal Area Network (PAN) technology (e.g. Bluetooth) are integrated as well.

Furthermore, "[r]ecords of the digital [IDentities (]IDs[)] involved would be stored on remote computer servers but the companies say these could not be used to unmask a specific individual's true identity."
But then the operators of the servers do know at least who is infected by chaining other metadata.

Interestingly, "[t]he European Union's Data Protection Supervisor sounded more positive, saying: "The initiative will require further assessment, however, after a quick look it seems to tick the right boxes as regards user choice, data protection by design and pan-European interoperability.""
Congratulation to the European Commission for getting the act together to shoot itself in both feet, even simultaneously and multiple times with one shot. We have never seen such a magic trick and crazy bullet before, but nevertheless are not surprised at all.
Indeed, talking with the hand is more effective.

Somehow we got more and more the impression that this is a coordinated effort from governments and lobbists to continue with controlling the narrative, and paint it as if the Ontologic System with the Ontologic System Architecture (OSA), Ontologic Net (ON), Ontologic Web (OW), and Ontologic uniVerse (OV), and also Ontologic Applications and Ontologic Services (OAOS), as well as the Ontoscope and other items have not been created by C.S..

11.April.2020

Ontonics Further steps

Around 5 days ago, we thought about another therapy against a virus (see also the Further steps of the 24th of March 2020 and the messages referenced therein), which should become certified and available in days. But at first we hesitated to publicate our considerations, because we feared that other experts would rip our heads off. Luckily, we learned some days later that it is a traditional therapy and might work in the case of a virus, indeed.
Since the last two days, we are thinking about a more advanced variant of said therapy, that would add and streamline something to eliminate some last few foundational deficits.

But it will not change anything. Signals and data gathered, captured or recorded, processed or transformed, or handled in any other ways in the

have to be shared with our SOPR. That is even supported and covered by the laws, regulations, and acts, as well as agreements related to property and mining.
And either Apple pays its damage compensations and does us some favours, or we will act as announced.
And either Alphabet (Google), which already has a lifetime ban, is sold to us under our Fair, Reasonable, And Non-Discriminatory, As well as Customary (FRANDAC) terms and conditions, or we will act as announced.

Next quote: "Apps including Private Kit and CoEpi, which had contacted Apple and Google for help a month ago, said the new tools would enable them to drop potentially unreliable workarounds."
See the note MIT and local governments working on illegal Corona-app of today.
But this is exactly the point. Both companies knew since a month that our SOPR platform is the right way to go and now they simply stole it from all other entities.

Btw.: That report and every link to that fake news would be dumped by the media platform of our SOPR immediately. -->

14.April.2020

04:35, 21:09, 22:20, and 23:51 UTC+2
SOPR #281

*** Work in progress ***
Topics
We have more opinions, comments, activities, etc. to summarize with this issue in relation to the following topics:

Legal matter
In the last days our impression and suspicion have been confirmed once again: Members of the F.R.German government and parliament as well as their organizations, committees, and so-called expert groups of academies either are

Honestly, we do not think that the only reason for the obsolete debate is a warning application, but other non-factual, subjective reasons, which are not good for freedom and democracy.

Corona warning app or anti-Corona-app
Fast, pragmatic solutions to protect health and life are necessary
need for much more data
a reliable data basis is also important for the containment of the pandemic
This app is crucial to enable differentiated tracking and prediction of the course of the pandemic.
A Corona-app will be an important part of the exit strategy
could play a major role in gradually easing existing restrictions
making a contribution to the quick and lasting removal of travel restrictions and border controls

The use of a so-called tracking app or application for motion tracking for tracing Corona infections.
use of Global Positioning System (GPS) data in combination with tracing apps

An anti-Corona-app can help here if it meets the following five conditions: It must be voluntary, appropriate, necessary, proportionate and temporary.
the use of apps must be voluntary / on a voluntary basis One need not copy the Big Brother methods of authoritarian states.
The Corona-crisis must not be used as a gateway to give companies new access to private data. Communication data contains sensitive and personal information and enjoys basic legal protection.
the data must be deleted again after a previously defined period of time

no patchwork o Corona-apps and data protection regimes, but that we proceed as coordinated as possible

measures to put societies respectively the worldwide community in a better position in the fight against future viruses and make them less dependent on international markets. A crisis shows that the global exchange of goods must not lead to dependencies.
development of a digital infrastructure that enables people to work from home without having to transfer data abroad.

a process of how to arrive at this data basis and also at the considerations or weighing up of interests
proposed task forces or working groups would now be the next important step at federal state level and also at federal level to use such task forces on an interdisciplinary basis, which would form a network with authorities, with associations in order to bring the data together and then monitor, and evaluate them continuously, and make recommendations.
introduction of task forces or any other measures

strong public health architecture, a massive investment in the capacity to do surveillance, contact tracing, isolation and quarantine, and a robust information system so that people know what to do and where to go if they are sick

all the needs and concerns and problems are taken into account and are included in this consideration, in a structured, clear, public, transparent process

In two recent notes we already said that the SOPR is thinking about measures to protect the rights of C.S. and our corporation as well as the members of our SOPR, and "[w]e will answer the latest exploitation of our reputation and goodwill, betrayal, and serious criminal activities, inclusive blackmailing, conspiracy, development of organized crime structures, and unlawful expropriation by national, multinational, and international entities."

We also made the statement two times in relation to the illegal donation of data with OS and Os that these are conditions of the societal compromise, social contract respectively the Articles of Association (AoA) and the Terms of Service (ToS) of our manging and collecting Society for Ontological Performance and Reproduction (SOPR), as well as out-of-court agreement, support agreement for national industries, and non-aggression agreement for our corporation, also referred to collectively as Big Deal, because

So one has to take our property and of course pay our royalties for it worldwide. No proper government can and will ignore national and international laws, regulations, and acts, as well as agreements.

Exactly these illegal activities are addressed in the regulations of the national societal compromise, social contract respectively Articles of Association (AoA) and the Terms of Service (ToS) of our managing and collecting Society for Ontological Performance and Reproduction (SOPR), as well as the out-of-court agreement, support agreement for national industries and non-aggression agreement for our corporation, also referred to collectively as Big Deal. Federal authorities do not have to provide such technologies (e.g. systems, platforms), goods (e.g. applications), and services, especially not such technologies, goods, and services that belong to the exclusive infrastructure of our SOPR. The establishment of joint ventures is also regulated, specifically when at all and how exactly with our company.
And in this point there is no discussion. These are the terms and conditions of the compromise, contract, out-of-court agreement and so on respectively Big Deal, because

So one has to take our property and of course pay our royalties for it. Worldwide. No proper government can and will ignore the national and international laws, regulations, and acts, as well as agreements.

We also said in the issue #278 of the 30th of March 2020 that if an end entity wants to use

then she or he or it has to comply with the Articles of Association (AoA) and the Terms of Service (ToS) with the License Model (LM) of our original and unique, exclusively managing and collecting Society for Ontological Performance and Reproduction (SOPR) respectively our original and unique, iconic OS, and therefore obviously the only single source of truth and trust.
We simply recall the issue SOPR #35 of the 24th of October 2017 and refer to the clauses related to digital democracy of the AoA and the ToS of our SOPR of said issue SOPR #35.

Therefore our SOPR

This means, that for example nobody must

to give some examples.

For sure, we do appreciate every constructive input and follow every honest advice, as can be seen with everything related to for example

But in case C.S. and our corporation are only mimicked, ignored, or even harmed, we will Keep It Simple and Stupid (KISS). :)
And because the rights of C.S. and our corporation are still infringed or even ignored, we also would like to recall for the unknowing or unteachable elements of our societies the following points:

• legal matter in general and
• regulations of the so-called Big Deal.

• 1. sign (preliminary) agreement
• 2. sign (preliminary) return and takeover contracts
• 3. pay initial damage compensations
• 4. begin returns and takeovers

We do not do anything else than all the large companies of the Information and Communication Technology (ICT) industrial sector do. If billions of entities trust in them, then they can do so easily and even better in our SOPR.
We do understand and acknowledge that our solutions are not understandable and acknowledgeable by the majority immediately, but we also do know through experience and from factual evidence that in the end the majority comes to our solutions.
What we do here is avoiding that (the usual) entities, who have no idea, no concept, no plan, and no courage to make a decision on their own, feel safe enough to come out of their holes and caves, and atempt to exploit the situation for their own benefit.

With so-called data donation applications of data collected, processed or presented with our Ontological System (OS), i.e. also our Ontoscope (Os), digital property is stolen from us.
By the way: Most mobile devices are based on our Ontoscope and also wrongly called smartphone, smartwatch, and activity tracker, which again is also called fitness tracker, fitness wristband, or smartband.

License Model (LM)
We are considering more options to protect our rights, for example by a (retroactive) revision of our License Model (LM) to reflect the digitalization of societies:

• Non-industrial sectors without ICT
  • 0.75 to 9.50%
• Public and federal institutes, State-Owned Enterprises (SOEs) without ICT
  • 2.00 to 10.75%
• Public and federal institutes, SOEs with ICT, non-industrial sectors with ICT, and industrial non-ICT sectors without ICT
  • 3.25 to 12.00%
• Industrial non-ICT sectors (e.g. physics, chemistry, biology engineering) with ICT
  • 4.50 to 13.25%
• Information and Communication Technology (ICT) sector
  • 5.75 to 14.50%

over

• Non-industrial sectors without ICT
  • 0.75 to 9.50%
• Public and federal institutes, State-Owned Enterprises (SOEs) without ICT
  • 3.25 to 12.00%
• Public and federal institutes, SOEs with ICT, non-industrial sectors with ICT, and industrial non-ICT sectors without ICT
  • 4.50 to 13.25%
• Industrial non-ICT sectors (e.g. physics, chemistry, biology engineering) with ICT
  • 5.75 to 14.50%
• Information and Communication Technology (ICT) sector
  • 7.00 to 15.75%

and

• Non-industrial sectors without ICT
  • 0.75 to 9.50%
• Public and federal institutes, State-Owned Enterprises (SOEs) without ICT
  • 4.50 to 13.25%
• Public and federal institutes, SOEs with ICT, non-industrial sectors with ICT, and industrial non-ICT sectors without ICT
  • 5.75 to 14.50%
• Industrial non-ICT sectors (e.g. physics, chemistry, biology engineering) with ICT
  • 7.00 to 15.75%
• Information and Communication Technology (ICT) sector
  • 8.25 to 17.00%

to

• Non-industrial sectors without ICT
  • 10.00 to 18.75%
• Public and federal institutes and State-Owned Enterprises (SOEs) without ICT
  • 11.25 to 20.00%
• Public and federal institutes and SOEs with ICT, non-industrial sectors with ICT, and industrial non-ICT sectors without ICT
  • 12.50 to 21.25%
• Industrial non-ICT sectors (e.g. physics, chemistry, biology engineering) with ICT
  • 13.75 to 22.50%
• Information and Communication Technology (ICT) sector
  • 15.00 to 23.75%

or higher.

Further steps
Now, we have lost once again a whole month with that obsolete nonsense debate about crystal clear legal matter and those illegal Corona-apps. But we will not change our point of view and standpoint, because there is absolutely no reason to accept

Instead, we are also considering to exit that nonsense debate and stop commenting and explaining in favour of finalizing our legal matters.

Indeed, we already said in the Ontonics Further steps of the 10th of April 2020, we are working on our strategy for the indictments and the lawsuits. So far we can already tell that the

No matter how small or large, or protected by governments companies are, they are playing with their existence in case they make the wrong decisions.

19.April.2020

Comment of the Day

CoronaTea™
CoronaTee™
Coronatella™
CoronaJam™
CoronaMarmelade™
CoronaKetchup™
CoronaBears™
CoronaBärchen™
CoronaGum™
CoronaKaugummi™

Ontonics Further steps

We are very pleased to give the information that our

are ready for certification, production, and consumption. :D

Extra funny: This is not the initial, first recipe (see the Further steps of the 2nd of April 2020).
Now, we are looking for improvements by composing or just mixing both of our recipes.
For sure, we are also looking for ways to make the other products of our Corona series possible as well, like for example Coronatella, CoronaJam==CoronaMarmelade, and CoronaKetchup.

We are also pleased to announce our new

which are our gummi bears, gummy bears, or jelly babies, and chewing gum based on our new recipes and compositions.

Mmmhhhh, yummy, yummy, yummy.

20.April.2020

08:00 UTC+2
SOPR #282

*** Work in progress ***
Topics

Legal matter
Nobody is forced to use our ArtWorks (AWs) and further Intellectual Properties (IPs), and become a member of our Society for Ontological Performance and Reproduction (SOPR).

But end entities, or better said, members of our SOPR have their rights and duties.
End entities, specifically companies that want to perform our Ontologic Applications and Services (OAOS) and reproduce our Ontologic System Components (OSC) and our Ontoscope Components (OsC) have to update their Terms of Service (ToS) to comply with the Articles of Association (AoA) and the Terms of Service (ToS) of our SOPR.

End entities, specifically end users, who want to use mobile devices based on our Ontologic System (OS) and our Ontoscope (Os), which comprise

would all have to participate in specific social and societal activities due to

or stop using our AWs and other IPs.

We guess that billions of end users will not stop using our OS and our Os, but will be happy to participate and also need some good explanations about the revised ToS.

SOPR infrastructure
The

are exclusive subsystems of the infrastructure of our SOPR and provided for SOPR members, that can set up their public and private technologies (e.g. subsystems and platforms), goods (e.g. applications and devices), and services on these subsystems, as we do with the platforms of our Ontologic Net (ON), Ontologic Web (OW), and Ontologic uniVerse (OV) as well.
Additional raw signals and data, informations, knowledge, and algorithms, as well as other technologies, goods, and services are available on the

Metadata, raw signals and data, and anonymous and anonymized mass signals and data

PIIs for example stored in a digital ledger (e.g. blockchain-based system)

See also the Investigations::Multimedia, AI and KM of the 7th of April 2020 for an incomplete list of signals and data being collected and processed.

Access

• consent of PIIs owner (e.g. SOPR membership or individual consent) or
• authorization of authorities (e.g. court order, state of emergency).

Utilization is logged in digital ledger.

• restrictions of access, utilization, etc.,
• requirements for e.g. ID and address in jurisdiction required and logging, and
• conductions of other measures.

IDentity and Access Management System (IDAMS)
We have our own digital IDentity (ID) in the OS. See the Feature-List #2 of our OS.
We also have ID spaces of the management structure of our Ontologic Net (ON), Ontologic Web (OW), and Ontologic uniVerse (OV) to fulfill the demand for and make the comprise between the cyber sovereignty of states and the sovereignty of our OntoVerse and C.S..

We have our own IDAMS of the infrastructure of our SOPR.
In the past, we discussed some IDentity and Access Management Systems (IDAMSs), including

As already said in the section SOPR infrastructure above, public and federal agencies, and other authorized members of our SOPR can hook into the IDAMS of our SOPR infrastructure, as done with the IDAMSs listed above.

We have our own our Ontologic Financial System (OFinS), including

We have the integration of our systems, platforms, and so on with the other systems, platforms, and so on, such as

• blockchain-based systems,
• Distributed Ledger Technology (DLT) of us (used illegally for Bitcoin, Ethereum, etc.), and
• other digital ledgers,

Our IDAMS comprises a biometric identification system and multimodal biometric cryptosystem respectively multimodal biometric encryption as subsystems (see the Ontonics, OntoLix and OntoLinux Further steps of the 4th of April 2020 and also the OntoLix and OntoLinux Further steps of the 13th of February 2018 for some technical details).
In the issue #209 of the 17th of July 2019 we named authorized entities, that are allowed to vet a person or another legal person (e.g. corporation), and issue a digital ID.
For the biometric data acquisition any device can be utilized that has the functionality of a

A member of our SOPR, specifically a citizen or an end user, who is interested in getting an ID, can register one or more biometric features, such as

The one or more biometric features are stored in an encrypted record, also called biometric record, which must include the

which will be used for the (record) encryption as well (see also for example the Peer-to-Peer (P2P) Virtual Machine (VM) Askemos based on our Evolutionary operating system (Evoos)).
An encrypted record is stored in a secure, unforgeable, centralized or distributed digital ledger or database.

Searchable Encryption and logging of utilization of the IDAMS based on a digital ledger or other secure, unforgeable data store allows the honest-but-curious server approach. But stronger adversarial models with or without logging, such as for example the semi-honest-but-curious server approach, can be applied as well depending on safety, security, performance, and other requirements.
Our IDAMS allows different authorized entities to

on a single database without revealing any sensitive information.
ID records, including biometric data, and user identifications and authentications are controlled, and also validated and verified continuously all the time by the OSystem core, while protectiong anonymity otherwise. Any ID theft, ID counterfeit, and ID fake, if possible at all, will be found swiftly and definitely.

Medicine and Healthcare
Just right from the start, our original and unique, iconic work of art titled Ontologic System and created by C.S.

• SoftBionics (SB),
• Systems Biology (SB or SysB),
• visualization,
• Visual Analytics (Visualytics),
• Business Intelligence (BI), Visualization, and Analytics (BIVA), and Data Science and Analytics (DSA), including
  • statistical learning and analysis,
  • data mining,
  • Big Data Fusion (BDF),
  • Big Data Processing (BDP), and
  • Big Data Analytics (BDA),
• medical informatics,
• healthcare informatics, and also
• multiomics,
  • genomics,
  • transcriptomics,
  • proteomics,
  • metabolomics,
  • microbiomics,
  • epigenomics, and
  • exposomics,

  as well as

• clinical data,
• medical data, and
• real world data,

• digitally enabled genomic,
• post-genomic individualized, and
• precision,

Medicine 4.0 and 5.0, and Healthcare 4.0 and 5.0, and

As already said in the section SOPR infrastructure above, public and federal agencies, organizations, and other eligible members of our SOPR can hook into the medicine and healthcare subsystems and platforms of our SOPR infrastructure.
If required for convincing reasons, joint ventures can be established with our SOPR, Ontonics, and other business units of our corporation.

24.April.2020

01:15, 01:55, 03:00, and 10:31 UTC+2
SOPR #283

*** Work in progress - maybe something incorrect or missing ***
Topics
As annouced, we have to give answers to the events of the last weeks, which tangent the following topics.

Legal matter

First of all, we make one of our monthly reminder for politicians, other decision makers, and other entities concerned:
Our SOPR is neutral and therefore

Eventually, a pandemic accelerated the whole process immensely and made the decison making much easier, or better said, started the automatism of clearly discussed and announced actions.
Said pandemic gave every entity concerned on the planet Earth an opportunity to begin together with our SOPR with the realization of the infrastructure and the subsystems and platforms of our SOPR. But instead of taking the chance, it was perverted and destroyed deliberately without any convincing reason and gain but with dedication.

We got more substantial evidence that warning apps was fraud all the time. So please do yourself a favour and do not use the phrase 'it is a crisis' and the term solidarity in this relation anymore, because that has been proven to be only one more lie.

But this is only another disgusting episode of a series of fraudulent activities: We got the

Those frauds of the first generation, so to say, are now used for commiting the frauds of the second generation, as could be seen with for example the

In addition, a group of companies of the Information and Communication Technology (ICT) industrial sector and their shareholders have not given up their untenable position despite they have absolutely no chance to get away with their illegal and serious criminal actions at the courts. Merely existing, taking part in a competition, and grouping is worth nothing when it cames to infringements of other rights.

And some states of the U.S.A. alone and together also do not want to be role models when it comes to the rights of C.S. and our corporation.

That indicates once again that nothing in relation to the fundamental position and attitude has changed, is changing, and will change, specifically the huge benefits are not understood or just rejected due to significant profound incompetences.
In general, we are unable to see

All those opposing entities just only want the power of control over all of our properties. Honestly, everything else would have been a wonder for us.

As annouced, we have to give answers to the events of the last weeks.
Understandably, those absolutely absurd point of views, criminal claims, and permanent attacks on the rights of C.S. and our corporation, damaging of the goals and even threatening of the integrity of C.S., our corporation, and our SOPR must have consequences.

Herewith, we

Howsoever, our SOPR does not go away, for sure, but the protocols will be changed to the usual ones, as discussed multiple times.

Eventually, everybody should be glad to get an individual license for a restricted part of our works of art at all on the basis of a

We demand triple damage compensations and triple admission fee since 1st of January 2007 and ask for a share of up to 25% of the overall revenue with all discounts granted for the performance and reproduction of our ArtWorks (AWs) and further Intellectual Properties (IPs).
A company, that is unable to pay the damages or royalties, is allowed to make a takeover offer to us. We offer 1 U.S. Dollar.

The Articles of Association (AoA) will be reviewed once again to find out if they are still required at all.

License Model LM)
We have already suggested a differentiated and individualized License Model (LM) in the issue ... of the ...
One alternative LM is to have no general, all-inclusive, flat rate licensing anymore. Licensing would only be allowed for a restricted part of our AWs and other IPs with a clearly defined scope or business process and limits fixed as a short business plan filled as part of a license application. This license application would be taken as the basis for our decision making if we give a license or not.

With the LM one technology, good, and service is licensed only on the basis of

according to said license application.
If an entity wants to license more, then we demand more royalties.
For example

all percentages with all discounts granted.

The term is 5 years. After the term ended a licensee can ask for extension for another term.

As simple implication and consequence, a

all percentages with all discounts granted.

Further steps
We spoke about an inviting letter or priliminary agreement. We also spoke about an emergency agreement. We also suggest a letter of intent. We will sent some kind of inviting letter or priliminary agreement, but this will be some kind of a letter of acknowledgement and intent as well. The addressed entity has to make clear in a legally binding way if it

If an entity does sign said legally binding letter of acknowledgement and intent, then our SOPR will begin a procedure with the goal to get an out-of-court agreement and licensing contract.
If an entity does not sign said legally binding letter of acknowledgement and intent, then we will enforce our rights in the common ways.
If an entity is not able to find any infringements of the rights of C.S. and our corporation, then we will be happy to help it together with a prosecutor and a judge.

12:53 UTC+2
Clarification

Time for us, the Hightech Competence, to make things clear, as usual, too:

26.April.2020

10:01 UTC+2
SOPR #284

*** Sketching mode - some contents might be overworked or removed ***
Topics
We are working on the revised 24th of April 2020 for some hours, which is much more than a revised issue and concerns the following topics:

Matter of the first publication will be incorporated in this revision.

Legal matter
After the confusion and chaos inflicted by companies, governments, and commission in Europe and states in the U.S.A. we got an even more sharper view on the whole situaton, specifically who, why, and how various entities acted.
Apparently they want to prevent something, among other things also that the whole of the broad mess becomes known by the public. Since this obviously cannot be prevented, however, continues to play on time. But there is no time left.

In general, we grasped the situation correctly, but interpreted some evidences wrongly at first. This shows how far the situation has developed, because specific evidences are not important anymore to draw the correct conclusions.

We said that the warning virus app belongs to our Medicine 4.0 and Healthcare 4.0 subsystems and platforms of the infrastructure of our SOPR. Therefore, it has to be a variant developed, provided, and operated under the centralized power of control and exclusive management of the infrastructure and the subsystems and platforms by our SOPR.
This should have been the launch of the SOPR infrastructure, if there had really been a consensus. But now we got the next proof that it never was.
The selection of a decentralized variant or another illegal variant, and to infringe the rights of C.S. and our corporation once again was a mistake by the governments for various reasons (see also the section Infrastructure below).

Legal matter [Super minister]
Nobody needs to beat us to do the job of a so-called super minister, though we do not know what the term means in the end and we have the opinion to be not qualified for any job in politics due to too much emotions, logic, law and order, conflicts of interest, ..., and other so-called deficits, and too less diplomacy, ignorance, ..., and other so-called competences.
Nevertheless, thank you very much for the offer.

License Model (LM)
5% 20y was always a no go, dead, obviously, definitely.
5.75% infinity is not retainable as well.
7% infinity does not solve the foundational problem either.
15% infinity is unfair for entities, that would enter into our out-of-court agreement or are not so profitable respectively have a weaker economy.
(Percentage always for the ICT industrial sector with all discounts granted. Not explicitly listed percentages are stepped by the known ranges for the different sectors.)
This demands our alternative License Model (LM) based on localized or even individualized terms and conditions, as discussed in former issues.

15% for the ICT industrial sector with all discounts granted

• Argentine Republic (short Argentina)
• Commonwealth of Australia (short Australia) 5 Eyes
• Federative Republic of Brazil (short Brazil) BRICS
• Canada G7, 5 Eyes
• People's Republic of China (short China) BRICS
• French Republic (short France) G7, EU
• Federal Republic of Germany (short Germany) G7, EU
• Republic of India (short India) BRICS
• Republic of Indonesia (short Indonesia)
• Italian Republic (short Italy) G7, EU
• Japan G7
• United Mexican States (short Mexico)
• Russia BRICS
• Saudi Arabia OPEC
• South Africa BRICS
• South Korea
• Republic of Turkey (short Turkey)
• United Kingdom G7, EU, 5 Eyes
• United States of America G7, 5 Eyes
• European Union
  • Republic of Austria (short Austria)
  • Kingdom of Belgium (short Belgium)
  • Republic of Bulgaria (short Bulgaria)
  • Republic of Croatia (short Croatia)
  • Republic of Cyprus (short Cyprus)
  • Czech Republic (short Czechia)
  • Kingdom of Denmark (short Denmark)
  • Republic of Estonia (short Estonia)
  • Republic of Finland (short Finland)
  • French Republic (short France)
  • Federal Republic of Germany (short Germany)
  • Hellenic Republic (Hellas; short Greece)
  • Hungary
  • Republic of Ireland (short Ireland)
  • Italian Republic (short Italy)
  • Republic of Latvia (short Latvia)
  • Republic of Lithuania (short Lithuania)
  • Grand Duchy of Luxembourg (short Luxembourg)
  • Republic of Malta (short Malta)
  • Netherlands (Holland)
  • Republic of Poland (short Poland)
  • Portuguese Republic (short Portugal)
  • Romania
  • Slovak Republic (short Slovakia)
  • Republic of Slovenia (short Slovenia)
  • Kingdom of Spain (short Spain)
  • Kingdom of Sweden (short Sweden)

• People's Democratic Republic of Algeria (short Algeria)
• Republic of Angola (short Angola)
• Republic of Equatorial Guinea (short Equatorial Guinea)
• Gabonese Republic (short Gabon)
• Iran
• Republic of Iraq (short Iraq)
• State of Kuwait (short Kuwait)
• State of Libya (short Libya)
• Federal Republic of Nigeria (short Nigeria)
• Republic of the Congo
• Kingdom of Saudi Arabia (short Saudi Arabia)
• United Arab Emirates
• Bolivarian Republic of Venezuela (short Venezuela)

  and

• Republic of Ecuador (short Ecuador)
• Republic of Indonesia (short Indonesia)
• State of Qatar (short Qatar)

Some economies are weaker:

Other nations in Africa, South America, Middle America, Asia, and Europe most potentially keep the LM as proposed or set for the 1st of January 2020.

Since more than a year, we are also working on a formula, which is based on the revenue, the profit, as well as other indicators of a member of our SOPR, like for example the scope of the business plan, market sector, goods and services, count of end users, etc., that should determine the royalties in a way, which is even more fair or just better than our LM already is.

We are considering to grant a discount of up to 5% when technologies, goods, and services are labelled according to our guideline.

The new LM might also lead to a point where our corporation will not provide own technologies, goods, and services, or even is not allowed anymore by laws to do so.

SOPR infrastructure [Location data]
A big topic discussed for nothing by trolls, anarchists, babbleheads, and self-exposers from politics, sciences, and industries was the distributed or decentralized system paradigm vs. centralized system paradigm in relation to a warning and tracing app, the so-called Corona app.
But we also had the impression somehow that the discussion was about preventing the upcoming infrastructure of our SOPR once again, because it merely reflected the ideologically transfigured point of views and wrong arguments of the proponents but also the fraudsters, who promote the so-called Decentralized Web (DWeb) (see the note Attention: Fraud with our OS of the SOPR #140 of the 9th of September 2018 and the issue #263 of the 2nd of January 2020).
We explained a lot once again (see the notes Attention: Fake news about Corona platform of the 24th and 25h of April 2020), specifically that our centrallized and decentralized infrastructure of our SOPR provides all benefits of both system paradigms.

Obviously, advanced mobile computing (keyword 5G), Grid, Cloud, Edge, and Fog Computing (GCEFC), Mixed Reality (MR), Augmented Reality (AR), self-driving car, Internet of Things of the second generation (IoT 2.0), including Smart Urban Systems (SUSs), etc. are not so easy in general and therefore the trolls must now explain how these technologies, goods, and services could work in a decentralized way, effectively, securely, economically, and so on. We can already tell every interested person that they will not succeed. Centralizated systems reduce complexity, obviously, and hence must be more secure, as the proponents of decentralized systems claim.
The fact is there is no this and that, so we do both and best with our Ontologic System (OS). Indeed, our OS variants OntoLix and OntoLinux were developed as what is called now the Decentralized Web (DWeb) at first. But our final Ontologic System Architecture (OSA) integrates all in one and therefore spans the spectrum with centralized systems at the one end and decentralized systems at the other end of the spectrum, and the best is the Mixed Web (MWeb) and the New Web (NWeb) respectively Ontologic Web (OW).

We also suggested that email services, online search engines, social networking, streaming, electronic commerce, and all the other centralized platforms, including app stores, would have to be done in a distributed way as well to be consistent.
In addition, the hardware would have to become completely transparent. Apple and Co. would have to disclose every business secret to be trustworthy.
Everyhting open but not free source and distributed or that discussion was only for the a$$? Closing Silicon Valley because not being open and transparent, safe and secure?
But where are all those clever entities now? There is no difference from their wrong point of views and claims. We can already tell every interested person that they will not come up, because the true reason andthe true motivation behind the Decentralized Web (DWeb) and such solutions are definitely not user privacy in the first place.

We told everybody multiple times in the past that the infrastructure and the subsystems and platforms of our SOPR are now coming anyway. And because we keep the power of control and the management, and do not allow more modifications of our OS in the course of a societal compromise, because you are not allowed to expropriate a work of art in general and you are even not able or willing to pay the minimal fraction of the customary price for our work of art in particular, the SOPR infrastructure is centralized, which is the infrastructure of the SOPR.

IDAMS [Mass surveilance]
In the issue #238 of the 18.October.2019 we said that another core principle included in the Articles of Association (AoA) and the Terms of Service (ToS) of our SOPR is that our Ontologic System (OS) and our Ontoscope (Os) are not suitable for

by a state.
But we also showed in the issue #282 of the 20th of April 2020 how we can conduct mass surveillance with our infrastructure without having the negative and unwanted side effects, for example that persons are always identified respectively only identified when federal regulations are met.
Even the operation of advanced Social and Societal Systems (SSSs) with integrated reward system are possible (see the issue #185 of the 4th of June 2019).

Further steps
We are not sure in the moment if we should still write a letter of invitation respectively what has become a letter of acknowledgement and intent, or go to the prosecuting authorities and the law enforcement agencies in the F.R.Germany and the U.S.America to take bad actors into a pan-Atlantic crossfire, so that no jurisdication can protect its actors, that obviously collaborated with the governments. For sure, problematic are companies like Microsoft, IBM, Facebook, and Co., but also Amazon, Porsche/Volkswagen, and so on, because they juped, are jumping, and will be jumping with everybody else into the bed and, mildly said, fornicate everywhere as long as their interests are benefitting.
I want my rights, now, and if I cannot get my rights due to other rights, then I want a comprise that truly is a comprise. But nothing and nothing fair are no options.

14:15 UTC+2
Clarification

*** Work in progress - merging of 3 notes ***
Time for us, the Hightech Competence, to make things clear, as usual, too:

• have to provide specific Personally Identifiable Informations (PIIs)
  • in an anonymous and anonymized way, that is legal and secure, and
  • at the right time and place, that is also legal and secure,

  or

• have to follow our demand and immediately stop using our AWs and other IPs, that is legal and for sure as well.

Even more absurd is the fact, that we own the OS and the Os, and do have the right solution with our OS, but they are fighting for the wrong and illegal, and even outdated solutions based on our OS.
But there are no turf war and no trial of strength, because C.S. has decided to act in the related ways in the early 2000s already when creating the Ontologic System.

• with location data and based on positioning system (e.g. Global Positioning System (GPS)),
• with contact data and based on Personal Area Network (PAN) technology (e.g. Bluetooth),
• with location data based on GPS and contact data based on PAN, and
• all 3 basic variants as centralized, decentralized or distributed system variants, or both.

Obviously, functionalities of the Global Positioning System (GPS) and the Personal Area Network (PAN) technology (e.g. Bluetooth) are already available for developers and users of tracking, tracing, and warning apps.

So what is going on behind our back? The government of the F.R.Germany is directly negotiating with the company Apple about a centralized system controlled by the state, which should not be controlled by a state in general and also is a part of the exclusive infrastructure of our SOPR in particular.

We recommend all companies to avoid being involved in politics, when the subject matter is related to our SOPR, because that is prohibited for exactly such a situation as well.
We also recommend all states and all other entities not to infringe the rights of C.S. and our corporation. What holds for European and U.S.American states that holds for Australian states as well.

We really do not need to discuss that matter any further: Our overall solution provided with our SOPR is rhe only legal, technical, workable, viable, and economically sustainable option. What the world is discussing here was thought through completely by C.S. around the years 2000 to 2006 and we will fight every troll, self-exposer, politician, and fraudster, who is now discussing utter nonsense only to end up in some few months where we already are since 2006.
We already had all that >>peep<<, >>peep<<, and >>peep<< with cloud computing and blockchain-based systems that all only ended in our Ontologic Net (ON), Ontologic Web (OW), and Ontologic uniVerse (OV).
As we said, there is only one social, societal, technological, and legal solution, which is our solution.

Ah, what ...? Wait a minute. Australia says exactly the same about the centralized variant like F.R.Germany says about the decentralized variant.
Also note how the F.R.German Corona app still includes the Trojan horse in its so-called trustworthy decentralized app with the option to sent Personally Identifiable Informations (PIIs) to the central server of its agency.
And that the right-wing CDU/CSU collaborated with left-wing to infring our rights tells us also something.
What a >>peep<<.
Howsowever, we do not give both the last word or allow both to make the final decision.
So now F.R.Germany is at 17.50%, some few are at 16.25%, and the rest of the EU is at 15.00% and all no Big Deal anymore.

Nevertheless, we do own at least the raw signals and data respectively the anonymized Personally Identifiable Informations (PIIs) provided as mass data or in real-time if required, and the government of Australia would be wise not to infringe our copyright and property right.

By the way: The blockchain technology was developed by N. Szabo and potentially other persons to get a secure, unforgeable data store or digital ledger. That was all - no processing of, no computing with, and no encryption of the stored data.
Indeed, N. Szabo and others also developed solutions based on the

But only we developed this blockchain technique and these other techniques and methods further by integrating them with everything else, specifically

• Artificial Life (AL),
• Artificial Intelligence (AI),
• Machine Learning (ML),
• Computational Intelligence (CI), including
  • Fuzzy Logic (FL),
  • Artificial Neural Network (ANN),
  • Evolutionary Computing (EC), including
    • Evolutionary Strategy (ES),
    • Evolutionary Algorithm (EA),
    • Genetic Algorithm (GA),
    • Evolutionary Programming (EP),
    • Genetic Programming (GP),
    • Hybrid Evolutionary Computing (HEC),
    • and so on,

    and

  • Swarm Intelligence (SI) or Swarm Computing (SC),
• Soft Computing (SC),
• Computer Vision (CV),
• Simultaneous Localization And Mapping (SLAM),
• Natural Multimodal Processing (NMP),
  • Natural Language Processing (NLP),
  • Natural Image Processing (NIP),
  • and so on,
• Emotive Computing (EmoC) and Affective Computing (AffC), and Emotional Intelligence (EI),
• Autonomic Computing (AC),
• Cognitive Computing (CogC),
• Cognitive Vision (CogV),
• Cognitive Agent System (CAS),
• Cognitive-Affective Personality or Processing System (CAPS),
• Common Sense Computing (CSC),
• Multi-Agent System (MAS),
• etc.,

• High Performance and High Productivity Computing (HP²C),
• Peer-to-Peer (P2P) computing,
• Grid, Cloud, Edge, and Fog (GCEF) computing, and
• volunteer and grid computing, including for example
  • Berkeley Open Infrastructure for Network Computing (BOINC) (e.g. Bitcoin, Ethereum, and Linux Foundation Hyperledger are based on our integrated Distributed Ledger Technology (DLT), which in this context is basically a BOINC for blockchain or Blockchain@Home),

• cryptosystems, including
  • Attribute-Based Encryption (ABE),
  • Partially Homomorphic Encryption (PHE) and Fully Homomorphic Encryption (FHE),
  • Probabilistically Checkable Proof (PCP) system,
  • Searchable Encryption (SE) and Verifiable Searchable Encryption (VSE)
• Secure INtrusion-Tolerant Replication Architecture (SINTRA),
• Peer-to-Peer (P2P) Virtual Machine (VM) Askemos based on our Evolutionary operating system (Evoos),
• ..., and
• verifiable or verified computing,

as part of our Ontologic Computing (OC).

But our integration does not change the fact that the blockchain technology is only for secure, unforgeable data storage when taken alone. Every more advanced blockchain-based system is a part of our OS already.

27.April.2020

10:35, 10:54, and 14:40 UTC+2
Ontonics Further steps

We only need 5 sentences to put the world upside down and send the children home and back to school.
By the way: We do not believe that the Arctic is ice-free in the year 2050. It is well known that we are already working on our last problem of letting it snow, also known as the Frau Holle==Mother Holle, Mother Hulda, or Old Mother Frost problem, in this and other regions.

We also continued with the development of our other business units, which got significant tailwind in addition to the boost by a pandemic. Honestly and without marketing chatter, it cannot work out in a better way.

16:47 UTC+2
Website update

We are revising our publications of the last 2 weeks. So no need to panic for our honest business partners.

29.April.2020