• Ontologic Net (ON),
• Ontologic Web (OW), and
• Ontologic uniVerse (OV),

or

• Trust Management System (TMS),
• IDentity and Access Management System (IDAMS),
• Consent Management System (CMS or ConsMS),
• Ontologic Financial System (OFinS),
• etc.,

are already exclusive tasks of our SOPR.

We quote an online encyclopedia about the subject 5G network slicing once again: "5G network slicing is a network architecture that enables the multiplexing of virtualized and independent logical networks on the same physical network infrastructure.[1 [Network Slicing to Enable Scalability and Flexibility in 5G Mobile Networks. [2017]]]
[...]
In the context of mobile networks, network slicing network architecture evolved from the concept of Radio Access Network (RAN) sharing [...]."

With the foundations of the operating system-level virtualization or containerization (e.g. Docker) we have a part of our Evolutionary operating system (Evoos) and hence of our OS, which includes Evoos as its successor.
The discussion if operating system-level virtualization is a type of hypervisior, Virtual Machine Monitor (VMM), or virtualizer, or not (see also below) is not relevant to determine the legal situation, because with

Eventually, our OS was taken as blueprint and its contour was traced, redrawn, and eventually reproduced, which is enough to show the legally required causal link.

We will address this matter also in relation to

specifically the so-called

which are included in the common backbone, core network, or fabric of the infrastructures of our Society for Ontological Performance and Reproduction (SOPR)
converged edge cloud and converged node are literally spoken on the edge, though there is no grid, no cloud, no edge, and no fog anymore, if they existed at all

Distributed operating system (Dos)

In accordance with the related clause of the Articles of Association (AoA) and the Terms of Services (ToS) of our Society for Ontological Performance and Reproduction (SOPR) a

is done by our SOPR to guarantee neutrality, openness, interoperability, and the other goals.

platform market and third party API economy

Complete management and orchestration of

• Apache Foundation,
• Cloud Foundry Foundation,
• Openstack Foundation, and
• Cloud Native Computing Foundation (CNCF),

will be done as the part of our OS, which can be described as Distributed operating system (Dos), Multi-Agent System (MAS), Wide Area Network (WAN) SuperComputer (SC) (WANSC), and so on, and by our SOPR due to the transition to what is wrongly called cloud native and legal reasons, and in the course of the restitution respectively retransition of our rights and properties and power of control (ownership).

In contrast to what we said before companies can have their own operating systems (oss), for example vehicle manufacturers can implement their own oss for their autonomous vehicles, but not their own os with sandboxing, and container packaging and deployment, and also container management and orchestration, which is all included in our OS anyway and vanishes again with cloud native, converged cloud and converged node, and further development to our original OS) for what is wrongly called Grid, Cloud, Edge, and Fog Computing and Networking (GCEFCN).
We definitely cannot recommend a properitary os to any entity anymore, because the container thing vanishes with the cloud native thing, which again vanishes or goes down where it belongs in the overall system stack respectively system architecture and also included Operating system Functions as a Service (FaaS) capability models and operational models (OpsFaaSx) besides Operating system as a Service capability models and operational models (OpsaaSx). It also provides more harmony and benefits for the peoples on planet Earth.

This also handles the case of Cloud RAN, Smart Network Fabric with its core cloud and converged edge cloud, and also converged node, big intercloud fabric, and any other attempt to close larger parts of our unclosed OS and make them walled gardens again.

Howsoever, this goes hand in hand with the liquid, molecular, organic (respectively modular, compatible, and so on) property of our Ontologic System Architecture (OSA), which integrates all in one, and our Ontologic Applications and Ontologic Services (OAOS), and the revision of the License Model (LM) all based on our OAOS and There is an API for that - at our SOPR broker or mediator, and API gateway.
Middleware (e.g. messaging, reverse-proxy, and asynchronous event-driven server, cluster computing, etc.) and batteries are always included.

This is more a legal and formal action of our SOPR and should not be viewed as an exploitation of our rights, because we already made clear that IaaS, PaaS, and so on is done by main contractors, suppliers, and service providers of our SOPR in a way, so that the revenues and profits (minus our royalties) are not affected. But there might be

Eventually, the requirements and the demands of the public, specifically for freedom of choice, innovation, and competition pro bono publico, are provided and therefore fulfilled, and the potentials and the benefits for the public are set free.

Running in a circle of fraud has reached the start again and in this way its end.

We have looked a little at

versus

At this point, it becomes obvious once again that

Side note for clarifying the legal situation even more: There was no mSOA and aaSx at Amazon Web Services (AWS) until at least the year 2009, because "a lot of Netflix OSS was written at a time where things ran on an AWS [Elastic Compute Cloud (EC2) and Simple Storage Service (S3)] and there were no alternatives". Only later aaSx and mSOA and Kubernetes and so on were added to such platforms and the importance of Netflix OSS and Spring Cloud decreased in the following years.
Spring Cloud on Kubernetes

Some say os-level virtualization or containerization is neither Host operating system (Hos) nor hypervisor or Virtual Machine Monitor (VMM), while others say os-level virtualization is a third type of hypervisor or VMM (see also the discussion below).

We said respectively showed that Kubernetes and Istio and so on have something of an actor-based and an agent-based system, specifically a Multi-Agent System (MAS), but also a Distributed operating system (Dos). In fact, it is an isolation of processes and also a complete user data environment so to say.
The problems become obvious with microService-Oriented Architecture (mSOA), like for example

which are the results of a bad overall system design or architecture.

Docker and Kubernetes are based on the

Netflix OSS and Spring Cloud are Java, but should be multilingual or polyglot like Kubernetes and Istio.

Netflix OSS and Spring Cloud use inversion of control container, and service registration fixed IP addresses, and DNS
Kubernetes uses fixed cluster virtual IP addresses called Services, and DNS for resolution of real IP address into virtual IP address, and some more automation, which can be viewed or is inversion of control as well. The virtual thing reminds us of Virtual Object System (VOS)
Kubernetes merely automates the service registration and service discovery.

Our OSA handles all features of such approaches, for example load-balancing by the service client (Netflix OSS and Spring Cloud) and service design (K and I). OS also includes all middleware (e.g. proxies, synchron and asynchron, etc.). These can be merged.

The system design direction taken with NOSS and SC, and also K and I and so on is typical for large companies, like Google and Amazon and Co.. Technical benefits are thrown away for economical advantages.
Our prime example in this context is eXtendable Markup Language (XML) is ditched for Java Script Object Notation (JSON) and in this way the whole Semantic (World Wide) Web (SWWW) is ditched respectively delayed by 2 decades. But we need SWWW and ontologies to get the logic AI into the system stack in a way as it has to be and because only ML (Google and Amazon approach) does not work.
The same is tried but will not happen with mSOA instead of Distributed os (Dos).

Automation and several other capabilities are missing, such as for example

• well-structured and -formed,
• reflective/holistice, and
• specification- and proof-carrying, and also

basic properties of our OS with its

• liquid, molecular, organic (respectively modular, compatible, and so on) property

of its integrating Ontologic System Architecture (OSA),

• push gateway down as system, platform, or service grow, and
• pull gateway up as system, platform, or service shrink,

which allow for example resolving the hard, rough, and rudimentary brute force approaches and related problems of

• network sockets and HTTP protocols, and also
• messaging (macro)services.

The same holds for other system tasks such as resilience (e.g. fault tolerance), message brokering, network management with load balancing, circuit breaker, cloud traffic control, service discovery, API management with gateway or API of APIs, and so on.
Required is only a different kind of system management and operation (or execution).

This leads us to interoperability, specifically Service Mesh Interoperability (SMI), and service mesh management is a SOPR task in addition to SOPR broker or mediator with

• registration for Ontologic Applications and Ontologic Services (OAOS) and APIs,
• discovery for Ontologic Applications and Ontologic Services (OAOS) and APIs, and
• gateway for Ontologic Applications and Ontologic Services (OAOS) and APIs

based on

which leads us back to the clause of the AoA and the ToS of our SOPR cited above.

When we are already at this point, then we get a kernel-less os, nanokernel os, microkernel os, or a relatively small os as Ontologic Core (OC) with the rest being liquid OpsFaaSx for what belongs to the kernel space and FaaS for what belongs to the user space.
from microservices to service landscape on the basis of our original and unique integrating Ontologic System Architecture (OSA) with its liquid, molecular, organic (respectively modular, compatible, and so on) property.

At this point we get an overall Dos, which is handled like one mSOA platform, respectively our OS with Evoos and this is our walled garden respectively OntoLand and we will not explain it once again to a government, an industrial company, or another entity.

Also keep in mind the parts, which replace the old Internet (e.g. addressing and routing), the old World Wide Web, the old Metaverse, and so on, and therefore also replace the related SOx and aaSx.

From operating system (os) over Virtual Machine (VM) and Virtual Machine Monitor (VMM), SuperComputing (SC or SupC) or High-Performance Computing (HPC) and High Performance and High Productivity Computing (HP²C) to our OS or better said all in our OS.
Most important for computing and networking systems in general and Distributed Systems (DSs) in particular are isolation and performance.
We never felt that virtualization is so important due to the increased complexity and operational overhead, and other deficitis and reasons, but management, security, and performance regarding quality and quantity, which is the reason why we laid our focus on the fields of

• Multi-Agent System (MAS),

• Scalable Infrastructure (SI) and
• Scalable Framework,

• High-Throughput Computing (HTC),
• High-Performance Computing (HPC or HPerC),
• High Performance Communications (HPC or HPCom),
• High Productivity Computing (HPC or HProC),
• Cluster Computing (CC or ClusterC),
• Distributed SuperComputing (DSC or DSupC), including
  • Grid Computing (GC), including
    • Opportunistic SuperComputing (OSC or OSupC), including
      • Berkeley Open Infrastructure for Network Computing (BOINC),

  and

• Many-Task Computing (MTC),

They provide isolation and performance and are directly connected with the field of Cognitive Agent System (CAS) and Fault-Tolerant, Reliable, and Trustworthy Distributed System (FTRTDS) (see Apertos (Muse) (not to confuse with the An evolvable Network of Tiny Sensors (ANTS) An Evolvable Operating System (ANTS-EOS) integrated in our OS and the Anthos based on our OS)), and also Askemos).
In this way, we get a harmonious integration and an overall system architecture virtually by definition and composition.

We quote an online encyclopedia about the chroot operation: "A chroot on Unix operating systems is an operation that changes the apparent root directory for the current running process and its children. A program that is run in such a modified environment cannot name (and therefore normally cannot access) files outside the designated directory tree.
[...]
To make it useful for virtualization, FreeBSD expanded the concept and in its 4.0 release in 2000 introduced the jail command.[6]
By 2002, an article written by Nicolas Boiteux described how to create a jail on Linux [7]
By 2003, first internet microservices providers with Linux jails provide SAAS/PAAS (shell containers, proxy, ircd, bots, ...) services billed for consumption into the jail by usage[8]
By 2005, Sun released Solaris Containers (also known as Solaris Zones), described as "chroot on steroids."[9]
By 2008, LXC (upon which Docker was later built) adopted the "container" terminology[10] and gained popularity in 2013 due to inclusion into Linux kernel 3.8 of user namespaces.[11]"

Comment
As its name already clearly says, the chroot operation only changes the root folder of a system and the related rights of system users with and without administrative privilege, but adds no user space instance and also virtualizes nothing at all.
In addition, File System (FS) operations are not (type 3) hypervisor or Virtual Machine Monitor (VMM) operations, which are based on two totally different operating system concepts.
The utilization of the chroot operation for os-level virtualization and microservices began after our Evoos was made public on Friday the 10th of December 1999. (Please note in this regard that The Proposal dated 28th of April 2000 is the digital and second version and the update of the first and physical version, which we want to scan and show as the original.)
Therefore, chroot jail cannot be cited as prior art in relation to os-level virtualization and definitely not in relation to microservices and subsequent developments in this area of containerization (see also the Investigations::Multimedia of the 16th of March 2019 and the Clarification of the 21st of January 2020).

We also quote an online encyclopedia about the subject operating system-level virtualization or containerization once again: "[Operating system]-level virtualization [or containerization] is an operating system paradigm in which the kernel allows the existence of multiple isolated user space instances. Such instances, called containers (LXC, Solaris containers, Docker), Zones (Solaris containers), virtual private servers (OpenVZ), partitions, virtual environments (VEs), virtual kernels (DragonFly BSD), or jails (FreeBSD jail or chroot jail),[1] may look like real computers from the point of view of programs running in them. A computer program running on an ordinary operating system can see all resources (connected devices, files and folders, network shares, CPU power, quantifiable hardware capabilities) of that computer. However, programs running inside of a container can only see the container's contents and devices assigned to the container.
On Unix-like operating systems, this feature can be seen as an advanced implementation of the standard chroot mechanism, which changes the apparent root folder for the current running process and its children. In addition to isolation mechanisms, the kernel often provides resource-management features to limit the impact of one container's activities on other containers."

Comment
As shown in the quote about the chroot operation before, chroot neither adds a user space instance nor virtualizes anything.
Indeed, FreeBSD jail provides somekind of isolation of user space or user space instance isolation, but does not provide process isolation, specifically operating system-level process isolation, and communication between different user space instances, which were already introduced with the integration of the fields of

• reflective os and
• Distributed os (Dos),

• Holonic Agent System (HAS) with abstract resources and resource allocation mechanisms,

by our Evoos, resulting in for example osVM or kernel Virtual Machine (kVM), os-level virtualization or containerization, and Peer-to-Peer (P2P) Virtual Machine (VM) (P2PVM)), which was later

Therefore, the

Eventually, both were only suggested many years after the publication of our Evoos to create non-existing prior art and mislead the public in relation to our Evoos.

We quote a document about network slicing and softwarization in the context of our 5G Next Generation (5G NG): "Besides the fundamental two types of hypervisor, a third one, known as Operating System-level (OS-level), virtualizes multiple servers [21 [IBM Systems Virtualization: Servers, Storage, and Software]] running in isolated containers. OS-level hypervisors support only the OS similar to that of the host since the virtualized servers, also known as Virtual Private Servers (VPS) [62 [A Comparison of Virtualization Technologies for [High Performance Computing (]HPC[)]]], share the host's kernel."
[...]
"Containers are created based on the idea of an OS-level virtualization [or containerization], where a physical server is virtualized to enable multiple instances of isolated servers to run as standalone applications. Containers are light-weight alternatives to hypervisor-based VMs, using the OS-level abstraction to partition the system resources creating multiple isolated userspace server instances [67 [Performance Evaluation of Container-Based Virtualization for High Performance Computing Environments]]."
[...]
"This [other type of hypervisor] contrasts with operating system-level virtualization, where all instances (usually called containers) must share a single kernel, though the guest operating systems can differ in user space, such as different Linux distributions with the same kernel."

We quote an online encyclopedia about the Platform as a Service toolset Docker: "Because all of the containers share the services of a single operating system kernel, they use fewer resources than virtual machines.
[...] The software that hosts the containers is called Docker Engine.[...]
[...]

Docker implements a high-level API to provide lightweight containers that run processes in isolation.[15]

Components
The Docker software as a service offering consists of three components:

Tools

Comment
The same holds for an actor-based system, an agent-based system, specifically Mutli-Agent System (MAS), and an os based on one of these system paradigms, specifically a Multi-Agent-Based Operating System (MABOS).

virtualization technology hypervisor, Virtual Machine Monitor (VMM), or virtualizer

deficits complexity and operational overhead, and also inflexibility and security in case of type 3
management, security, and performance regarding quality and quantity

Obviously, no lesson learned with interpreted programming languages and their VMs and Just-In-Time (JIT) compilers, such as for example Java, Java VM (JVM), and Java JIT.

due to the deficits inflicted by the additional virtualization layer the elimination of the virtualization layer followed with more actor-based, agent-based, HP²C, and Dos, as well as CNF, and eventually OS.

For sure, optimization leads to

whereby the roundabout way via virtualization was not needed at all for technological reasons, but for stealing the related parts of our OS, simulating an ordinary technological progress, or other reasons.

Correspondingly, around 2015, attempt to define something new, like for example

For example, cloud platforms

We quote an online encyclopedia about the subject of Cloud-native Network Function (CNF): "A Cloud-Native Network Function (CNF) is a software-implementation of a network function, which runs inside a Kubernetes container and replaces a network function, which would traditionally be performed by a physical device.[1][2][3] Cloud-Native Network Functions [(CNFs)] are a successor to Virtualized Network Functions [(VNFs)], one of the components of Network Function Virtualization [(NFV)]. The characteristics of Cloud-Native Functions are[4 [Cloud-Native Network Functions. Cisco]][5]:

Comment
First of all, a CNF is a containeritzed and software-based NF. Therefore, a CNF still is an os-level VNF or (special variant of a) VNF based on the integration of a VNF with containerization and SOx, including mSOA, but not a successor of VNF.
Furthermore, a container without Virtual Machine (VM) is no container anymore, but more the beginning of the Docker software again, which is based on

The foundations of SDN-NFV-VNF and mSOA, as well as what is wrongly called Resource-Oriented Computing (ROC) are included in our Evoos brain-like operating system, and Evoos and Semantic SOx are included in our OS, therefore a CNF eventually is based on our OS.
Furthermore, the utilization of CNFs as parts or components of a higher system also shows the causal link with our OS one again.

Therefore, in case a CNF is used with the so-called

that eliminate (most of) the deficits with containers, we are even not in the scope of containerization anymore, but back at the fields of os and Dos, and our Evoos and OS again.

from Kubernetes to Knative
"serverless Architecture (e.g. Knative (native containerization for serverless workload building, executing, deploying, and managing; "Knative is infrastructure to allow the programming models to run on any operational model. Sure, now you're managing [Kubernetes (]K8S[)] (or [Google Kubernetes Engine (]GKE[)] or whatever), but you can program in the same model.", [Google, 2018], and etc. or simply said Kubernetes-based platform becomes a (distributed) Virtual Machine (VM) or even an (distributed) operating system", note Google Cloud Platform and Nokia 5G collaboration of the 17th of March 2021
At this point one can see once again that Google is doing the same on the basis of Kubernetes (and on the os-level) as it did before with Kubernetes itself (and on the application-, actor-, or agent-level) in relation to our OS. But this time it is definitely too much evidence that shows a causal link with our OS.
If we continue, then we always get more and more of an os respectively Dos and eventually our OS again.

from SaaS on IaaS with hypervisor and VM, and PaaS (Kubernetes) to SaaS on Container as a Service (CaaS) (Kubernetes),

• utilizes hypervisors rather than Linux namespaces to isolate processes from one another and the Docker Remote API,
• serverless container platform,
• container-native IaaS, which allows
  • developers to provision secure containers on demand without hosting VMs respectively
  • platform providers to provision secure container hosting service,
• no VM to manage,
• no cluster to schedule,
• effortless Docker hosting, "Container-native Cloud! We make the VM cluster go away. Create, Deploy, Manage your Docker containers just like on your laptop!"

• hypervisor-based Docker engine Hyper
• allows running Docker container images (read-only template that contains a set of instructions for creating a static, persisted container, that are running on the Docker platform as an image instance - a collection of files required to configure a fully operational container environment; package that contains application components and their necessary libraries into ready-to-launch and easy to distribute) with any hypervisor
• Hyper is different from the minimalist Linux distributions by the fact that Hyper runs on the physical box and loads the Docker images from the metal into VM instances created on-demand, in which no guest os is present. Instead of virtualizing a complete operating system, Hyper boots a minimalist kernel in the VM to host the Docker images.

• multi-tenancy for microservices,
• stack node - Kubelet - Hyper - Kubernetes Pod - container whereby Pod with container is a Virtual Machine (VM)

from Container as a Service (CaaS) on IaaS and PaaS as Consistent or Common Operating Environment (COE)) respectively container-native cloud to native container cloud HyperCaaS as COE with hypercontainer without a (separate) Virtual Machine (VM),

• successor of Docker Hyper,
• Kata Container is both VM and container,
• secure, lightweight Kubernetes Container Runtime Interface (]CRI[)] compatible virtualized containers are managed directly individually by a single hypervisor, rather than running in individual VMs, runtime launches each container with its own kernel instance in a lightweight virtual machine
• "The speed of containers, the security of VMs",
• MicroVM Platform,
• Kata Containers project consists of subprojects, including Agent, Runtime, Proxy, Shim, Kernel, and a QEMU 2.9 package.

• implements most of an OS (around 200 Linux system calls) in userspace and only going to the host OS when necessary and allowed,
• no hypervisor or Virtual Machine Monitor (VMM),
• lightweight benefits of containers (speed), and control of VMM and host-based kernel filters (security),
• used in App Engine standard environment, Cloud Functions, Cloud ML Engine, and Cloud Run with container runtime contract,
• integrated with Google Kubernetes Engine, and
• allows users to sandbox their Kubernetes pods ((Docker) containers) for use cases like SaaS and multi-tenancy.

As we said in relation to Grid, Cloud, Edge, and Fog Computing and Networking (GCEFCN) and cloud-native (see also above and below), once again more features and functionalities of

• microkernel-based os,
• capability-based os, and
• Distributed os (Dos),

by removing complexity and operational overhead of VM and other deficits for more security, performance, and flexibility, while still based on an os kernel and related things, or being precise on our Ontologic operating system Core (OntoCore (OC)) component, and eventually more of our OS.

The service mesh infrastructure layer is a good example for a part of our OS that has been copied by one group and then copied by another group to simulate a competition in this field. But the related clause in the AoA and the ToS only covers existing activities and the service mesh in relation to container management and orchestration platforms does not qualify. It is even a matter that affects every member and licensee of our SOPR, so that a management and orchestration of a common service mesh by our SOPR is required in addition to the management and orchestration of the common backbone, core network, or fabric as part of the infrastructures of our SOPR.

Even more important is the fact, as shown above, that the developments of the last 6 years are characterized by less virtualization and more HTC, HP²C, MTC, Dos, cloud-native, which also shows doubtlessly that there is less and less matter, which is not covered by this clause of the AoA and the ToS, so that the decision of our SOPR in relation to IaaSx, IIaaSx, PaaSx, IPaaSx, NaaSx, etc., etc., etc., and so on is absolutely reasonable and has been completely confirmed once again.

... but not in combination, composition, or integration with SoftBionics (SB) (e.g. Artificial Intelligence (AI), Machine Learning (ML), Computer Vision (CV), Simultaneous Localization And Mapping (SLAM), Cognitive Agent System (CAS), Multi-Agent System (MAS), Evolutionary Computing (EC), Swarm Intelligence (SI) or Swarm Computing (SC), etc.), Mediated Reality (MedR) spectrum, including of Augmented Reality (AR), Augmented Virtuality (AV), and Mixed Reality (MR) besides Virtual Reality (VR), Massively Multiplayer Online Game (MMOG), Cyber-Physical System (CPS), Internet of Things (IoT), and Networked Embedded System (NES),
no modification of OS for another transformation of existing businesses and even another transformation of their transformation to cloud platforms respectively by retaining what was stolen with GCEFCN.
so-called IoT edge is included in the fields of Cyber-Physical System of the second generation (CPS 2.0), Internet of Things of the second generation (IoT 2.0), and Networked Embedded System of the second generation (NES 2.0)

no innovation but either old wine in new wineskins or new wine in old wineskins. either way it is about or OS
The loopholes os-level virtualization or containerization, and microservices do not exist when taken alone, and their non-existence is even more crystal clear when they are taken together or in combination.

Eventually, one can see that The Cloud was a dead-born child and only a marketing thing all the time, as we always said, and The Metaverse is also an idea of the last century.
We never have gone this way, but only talked about related utilizations and listed the related features of our OS, and all of our statements, explanations, and clarifications were only meant as a translation of things of Grid, Cloud, Edge, and Fog Computing and Networking (GCEFCN) to the OSA and OSC of our OS, including the Evoos and the Ontoverse, and as a comparison how it is done right with our OS.

Our OSA with its liquid, molecular, organic (respectively modular, compatible, and so on) property integrates all in one, including os, Dos, VM, and VMM, as well as HTC, HP²C, MTC, etc., etc., etc., which means every combination, composition, integration, unification, and fusion is covered and included in our OS by creation and design (respectively expression of idea).

In fact, the problems that all oss and GCEFCN platforms have, we had in the early 2000s as well with Dos, and MAS, and also their integration. But at that time we also concluded that we have a brain-like os with Evoos already. Bingo! Our OS is not based on a specific architecture, but uses SoftBionics (SB) (Artificial Intelligence (AI), Machine Learning (ML), Computer Vision (CV), Simultaneous Localization And Mapping (SLAM), Cognitive Agent System (CAS), Multi-Agent System (MAS), Evolutionary Computing (EC), Swarm Intelligence (SI) or Swarm Computing (SC), etc.) to form, monitor, adapt, learn, select, and optimize subarchitectures of the overall OSA automatically and intelligently.

Howsoever, we have some additional terms, like SOx and aaSx, and a common language for discription and discussion, though some terms might be rejected due to our original designations.

Despite this is only the beginning the realization of our OS has already become quite impressive even at this early stage and one can feel that there is something new and how it is becoming the New Reality (NR).
By the way:

It is always better to collaborate with us. The true #1.

05.April.2021

Comment of the Day

"There are untold riches in running the internet of other people's things.", [Songwriters Guild, Google vs. Oracle, 2020]

06.April.2021

Style of Speed Further steps

Our unparalled and unmatched success story of Style of Speed continues and there is no end in sight.

We got the confirmation that our Active Motors, also wrongly called smart motors,

• Active Component (AC) system, such as an and also
• overall Active Motor system, also wrongly called smart motor system, and
• overall integrated active system, also wrongly called smart system,

and

• Cyber-Physical System of the second generation (CPS 2.0), Internet of Things of the second generation (IoT 2.0), and Networked Embedded System of the second generation (NES 2.0), and
• Grid, Cloud, Edge, and Fog Computing and Networking (GCEFCN),

• increases the effectivity of conventual electric motors by at least 33% in comparison to a standard electric motor with Variable-Frequency Drive (VFD), Adjustable-Frequency Drive (AFD), Variable-Voltage/Variable-Frequency (VVVF) drive, Variable Speed Drive (VSD), Alternating Current (AC) drive, micro drive, or inverter drive according to the National Renewable Energy Laboratory (NREL), and
• reduces heating and cooling motor energy consumption by at least 64 to 80%,

• refrigerators,
• Heating, Ventilation, Air Conditioning (HVAC) systems,
• vehicles,
• industrial machinery,
• and so on,

and

and all of this

We have never claimed anything else.

As consequence, our Active Components (AC) have been confirmed as an extension of our Ontoscope Components (OsC) and therefore are included in the oeuvre of C.S. as copyright protected ArtWorks (AWs) and not merely further Intellectual Properties (IPs).
We have never claimed anything else.

08.April.2021

Picture of the Day

© :(

09.April.2021

15:21 UTC+2
Never fair use in relation to OS
Clarification

In addition to the conclusions made in relation to our original and unique, copyrighted work of art titled Ontologic System, created by C.S., and exclusively managed and exploited by our Society for Ontological Performance and Reproduction (SOPR) with the consent and on the behalf of C.S., we made the addtional conclusion that our original and unique ArtWorks (AWs) and further Intellectual Properties (IPs) included in the oeuvre of C.S. can never be copied under the fair use doctrine and the idea-expression doctrine in whole or in part, because

• Ontological argument,
• multiple ways this Ontological argument is expressed as
  • mathematical and logical code or program,
  • operating system,
  • multiple ways this operating system is expressed,
  • multimedia system,
  • multiple ways this multimedia system is expressed,
  • cybernetic self-portrait, or self-image (selfie),
  • multiple ways this cybernetic selfie is expressed,
• cybernetic self-augmentation and cybernetic self-extension, (e.g. Ontoscope, also wrongly called smartphone, iPhone, and so on),
• multiple ways this cybernetic augmentation and extension is expressed, and also
• Caliber/Calibre,
• Ontoverse,
• composition of basic properties, subsystems, applications, and services, as well as functions,
• design of the Ontologic System Architecture (OSA),
• desgins of the subarchitectures,
• liquid, molecular, organic property of the OSA,
• vast range of Ontologic Applications and Ontologic Services (OAOS),
• integration of Ontonics,
• integration of SoftBionics (SB) (Artificial Intelligence (AI), Machine Learning (ML), Computer Vision (CV), Simultaneous Localization And Mapping (SLAM), Cognitive Agent System (CAS), Multi-Agent System (MAS), Evolutionary Computing (EC), Swarm Intelligence (SI) or Swarm Computing (SC), etc.)
• etc., etc., etc..

Simply said, even the companies Google, Apple, Amazon, Microsoft, and Co. always failed, are failing, and will be failing to avoid a causal link with our OS no matter how entities distort and damage the foundations of democracy, the principle of law and order, and the other achievements of civilization.

20:10 UTC+2
Success story continues and no end in sight

Disney announced to establish a site in our Ontoverse, also wrongly called Metaverse, for its Disneyland after it already decided to perform and reproduce our Ontologic System Components (OSC) and Ontoscope Components (OsC) for its various Ontologic Applications and Ontologic Services (OAOS), like for example Disney+, since several years now.

We quote an interview with the Disney Parks Chairman Josh D'Amaro: "[...]
[Q:] What do Disney Parks look like post-pandemic?
[A:] First I'd say we've got a long legacy here. Again, at Disneyland, Walt walked these streets. I want to make sure that we protect that legacy, that we make sure that we continue to be that magic that people expect of us.
At the same time, we've got an opportunity to pivot and invite brand new guests into our world, and infuse brand new character and intellectual property heading to our parks. Look at new technologies that will make the experience even better than it was before we went into the pandemic.
[Q:] In the last year, streaming has become the primary focus for Disney. In many ways, Disney is very much a tech company now. How do the parks fit into that new focus?
[A:] I think they fit perfectly. Clearly, Disney+ has been phenomenally successful at the Disney company. We have the benefit of having these unbelievably powerful assets in the ground and the combination of a company that's got such a strong and growing digital footprint, with the physical footprint, I think gives us opportunity to fuse those two things together like no other company can.
I'm sure you've heard this word before: "metaverse." Ontoverse. An opportunity to essentially bring these assets into a digital framework. It provides us with unending opportunities at these theme parks. It can bring Main Street alive in ways that you've never seen it before, never thought about it before. You can have the whole theme park participate in a game that culminates in a celebration at the hub at the top of Main Street. The possibilities are endless and I think that's where we're incredibly unique at the Disney company. This combination of a very forward-looking digital footprint with our legacy assets that we have in place, and making them incredibly relevant today.
[Q:] Do you think we're going to see more synergy between Disney+ and the parks in terms of content, both when you walk into the parks or when I turn on Disney+?
[A:] Absolutely. I think that as the Disney company continues to see such huge success with Disney+, and as you see new intellectual properties start to materialize - whether that be in the world of Marvel or the Imagineers creating something incredibly new and interesting - that is the Disney difference. We will bring those things together to take to the world in a different way. [Marvel's] Avengers Campus will be a campus that will never be done. As [Marvel President] Kevin Feige continues to create new stories, new characters, those stories and characters will show themselves at the park.
[Q:] Can you give some examples of new technologies we're going to see in the parks post pandemic?
[A:] We have a new reservation system in place and that's done phenomenally well during this Covid situation. We have mobile order, [which means] people are having a much easier time finding places they want to eat and have experiences that allow them to then spend more time in the parks and with their families.
You'll see, ultimately when we open Avengers Campus, the way that we've layered technology into the attractions and the merchandise and the food venues.
[Q:] How does that technology help the enjoyment of your guests?
[A:] It extends the existing footprint of our parks in ways that there's no cap on. It allows us to tell stories that are incredibly relevant to the specific person we want to talk to.
You can think about a digital overlay on any single land, any single attraction, any single merchandiser or food facility that we have, that can be constantly changing in a way that makes it feel completely new and different to a guest that visited just the day before. If you think about our physical footprint and being able to essentially make that new every day, the possibilities here are unending."

Comment
Mickey Mouse and Minnie Mouse at home in OntoLand, too, like Kermit and Miss Piggy, as well as Snow White and the Magic Mirror World.
They are all coming to OntoLand.
This is even beyond our imagination and the magic of Disneyland. Yeah.

Please note that our Ontoverse is the one and only one as part of our original and unique, copyrighted work of art titled Ontologic System, created by C.S., and exclusively managed and exploited by our Society for Ontological Performance and Reproduction (SOPR) with the consent and on the behalf of C.S..

13.April.2021

SOPR #322

*** Work in progress - better structure and wording ***
Topic
This issue summarizes various notes, statements, and comments made since the publication of the latest issues in relation to the following subject matter:

Legal matter
Our Ontologic System (OS) is a work of art and much more than just an ordinary operating system, distributed system, virtual world, or app store.

{Recall
what did not work legally

The societal compromise to open our Ontologic System (OS) with its Ontologic System Architecture (OSA), and allow and license the performance and reproduction of certain parts of our OS was proposed on the basis that the

• provision of freedom of choice, innvoation, and competition, as well as
• release of potentials and other benefits

pro bono publico==for the public good, and

legal development:

By the way:

walled garden, aka. OntoVerse, aka. OntoLand, aka. paradise

All major governments and their industries have broken one of the basic clauses as part of the societal compromise by continuing with mimicking C.S. and our corporation, including our SOPR, and taking more of our AWs and further IPs than they need to keep their initial businesses running.

For sure, we suggested at first to modify and open our Ontologic System (OS), and allow and license the performance and reproduction of parts of it to a much broader extent.
But then we had to observe that companies in the Information and Communications Technology (ICT) industrial sector but also in other industrial sectors (engineering, automobile, aircraft, biotechnology, finance, etc.) tried alone and together to realize a strategy with a related plan, that has the goal to take over the control over our OS, which is considered as some kind of stealing.

{matter of consideration} Obviously, vehicle manufacturers got respectively took everything required to build, control, and sell their vehicles and other related goods, so that for example own operating systems (oss), Service-Oriented technologies (SOx), and as a Service capability models and operational models (aaSx) are not required in addition, while other parts of our OS are not required for other companies (see also for example the issue SOPR #320 of the 30th of March 2021).

Some decisions of companies and other entities in the last year have at least the potential to disturb the goals and even threaten the integrity of our Society for Ontological Performance and Reproduction (SOPR), specifically in relation to the Ontologic Economic System (OES) of our SOPR and the fields of

We also had the impression sometimes that companies use their portfolios of technologies, goods, and services and their related so-called walled gardens against C.S. and our corporation despite it is crystal clear now, that they depend on our original and unique work of art titled Ontologic System, created by C.S., and exclusively managed and exploited by our SOPR with the consent and on the behalf of C.S.. This is also the reason why our SOPR is tending more and more to manage our OS as a walled garden as well, or better said as an unclosed paradise, in which the members and licensees of our SOPR have only a patch with an ornamental wall.

exsiting companies moved even more from operating system (os) to Ontologic System (OS), specifically to OpsaaSx

transition from legal to technical development:

The activities in the fields of

also

• generation 1.0 is still a possibility, which is sufficient to remain at this state of the art,
• it is even possible to remain at generation 1.0 Internet and World Wide Web (WWW) computing
• generations 2.0 space computing and 3.0 ontologic computing are
  • still an adaption or a transition from an operating system (os), and applications and services to our Ontologic System (OS), and Ontologic Applications and Ontologic Services (OAOS), which is allowed by the AoA and the ToS of our SOPR, or
  • already an action or a mimicking of C.S. and our corporation, including our SOPR, which is prohibited by the AoA and the ToS of our SOPR
• this development is still a transition from os to OS and related transformation, or already mimicking of C.S. and our corporation

But these questions already became superfluous with every further integration according to the Ontologic System Architecture (OSA) and we often said that this moment has already been reached and the level of integration is already sufficiently high and the state of the art.

Since some days, we are thinking about the latest developments in relation to our Ontologic System (OS) and our Society for Ontological Performance and Reproduction (SOPR), specifically if the

The

including the

• Operating system aaSx (OpsaaSx),
• Network aaSx (NaaSx),
• Connectivity Management aaSx (CMaaSx), and
• similar aaSx,

must be considered in a much broader [legal] context (see the Investigations::Multimedia, AI and KM of the 7th of March 2021 and Investigations::Multimedia, AI and KM of the [Ontoverse]), because entities basically use what they pay for.

We have seen this before in many other fields, such as for example the

Last year with the companies in relation to raw signals and data, and informations, and once again with companies in the field of RPA in relation to models and algorithms both in relation to the Marketplace for Everything (MfE) of our SOPR. Note how these areas of activities complement the exclusive trade areas of our MfE.

Specifically mind opening were the facts that founders of ICT companies, but also other founders and managers of other leading companies are still mimicking C.S. and our corporation directly and damaging the goals and even threatening the integrity of C.S. and our corporation together with their companies alone and in collaboration with other companies and even governments being lobbied by them or having own goals, and that the suspicious companies, including the ridiculously high valued start-ups, also known as unicorns, apply exactly the same playbook with its fraudulent strategies and methods, as worked out, shown, and documented by us before with the largest companies of the ICT and financial industrial sectors.
Eventually, the instruments used for the fraudulent actions and crimes only changed, but the responsible entities remained the same.

We can only see that all major governments and their industries have chosen the

and made them their big new better green plans and deals.
But in this way, they have infringed one of the first basic clauses as part of the societal compromise in relation to the opening of our Ontologic System (OS), and the allowance and license for the performance and reproduction of certain parts of our OS, that is

All major governments and their industries have infringed one of the first basic clauses as part of the societal compromise or big new better green deal in relation to opening our OS, and allowing and licensing the performance and reproduction of Ontologic Applications and Ontologic Services (OAOS) and the performance and reproduction of certain Ontologic System Components (OSC) and Ontoscope Components (OsC) required for said performance and reproduction of OAOS and also related works under Fair, Reasonable, And Non-Discriminatory, As well as Customary (FRANDAC) terms and conditions, and that is

by copying our projects and investment programs with the same or more amounts of capital.
But in doing so our profit of 100% will be distributed on several parties and their cliques and most potentially reduced to 20 to 25%. For sure, we are recalculating again.

We have also been confirmed in the fraudulent intentions of the usual suspects, that is to scam our capital and our power and influence, that come with it.

And those other

• parts of our Web 3.0, Web 4.0, and Web 5.0 (also wrongly called as the frauds Decentralized Web (DWeb) and Web3, Decentralized Finance (DeFi), and Decentralized Commerce (D-Commerce)),
• cryptocurrencies for every nonsense and for every kind of fraudulent scheme,
• digital objects secured with a link to a Non-Fungible Token (NFT) and payed by those cryptocurrencies, and

are all attempts to disturb the goals and even threaten the integrity of C.S. and our corporation and somehow to get the power of control over our AWs and further IPs.
They all alone and together direct the whole thing, our OS, our SOPR, and so on, again in a way that should not happen anymore due to our willing to open the oeuvre of C.S. and modify the original and unique ArtWorks (AWs) and further Intellectual Properties (IPs) included in it, and allow and license the performance and reproduction of them.
If the situation does not improve, then we can also

And there is the lobbyism. It is never a plan of a politician.
And then we have the so to say ordinary fraud as well.
And these activities and developments all fit together and are connected somehow.

But again, this is not the basis for said societal compromise. We said that we open our OS to a more than sufficiently large extent so that all entities can continue with doing their activities on the basis of our OS, specifically companies can continue with doing their businesses and providing freedom of choice, innovation, and competition pro bono publico.

We have made promises and committed to what we offered, but the other side did not act as it should be in a negotiation phase.
Then we made the big last test, and said that we want all of our rights and properties back. And the other side that no, we do not want to give back what we have stolen from you before.
Even more worse, the whole law and order was bent and distorted once again by unconstitutional dirty tricks of governments and federal authorities.

But in the meantime, we observed that for example companies have not only transformed their businesses and are doing their business activities on the basis of our OS, which by the way are already our businesses proven by the fact that these companies still exist and have not declined and vanished, but are still focusing on our businesses and developing their businesses further on the basis of our OS and our businesses.
One implication of this process is somehow that we have no need anymore to open our OS for the earlier fraud related to our businesses (e.g.

Eventually, in the same way that

In this context, we are not only talking about infringements of our moral rights and copyrights, but about the interest of the public in law and order.

In this context, we made crystal clear that we

technical development:

now we are talking about the next generations of computing

We took a quick look at a collaboration of companies in the fields of 5G Next Generation (5G NG) and Grid, Cloud, Edge, and Fog Computing (GCEFC), specifically network hardware manufacturers and GCEFC platform providers, and the intersections of their areas of activities in the subfield of edge computing.

One specific collaboration is based on the hybrid and multi-cloud platform of a GCEFC platform utilized with the

and there is the potential of overlaps with the management and orchestration of the common backbone, core network, or fabric of our Ontologic Net (ON), Ontologic Web (OW), and Ontologic uniVerse (OV) by our Society for Ontological Performance and Reproduction (SOPR), specifically in the case a Communication Service Provider (CSP) or a Telecommunication Service Provider (TSP) also uses the GCP for its wired communication services.

By the way:

• Cloud-native Network Function (CNF), as well as
• microService-Oriented Architecture (mSOA)
  • operating system-level virtualization or containerization, and orchestration,
  • service mesh or hybrid cloud service management for
    • connecting (controlling the traffic flow and Applications Programming Interface (API) calls, and deploying),
    • securing,
    • controlling (applying policies and distributing resources fairly), and
    • observing (automatic tracing, monitoring, and logging),
  • Application Programming Interface (API) and microservice gateways for
    • management,
    • security,
    • monitoring,
    • predictive analytics, and
    • scaling,

    and

  • service middleware,

  with our Ontologic System (OS), including our Evolutionary operating system (Evoos), [as also recalled in general] and now showed the same in relation to

  • serverless Architecture (e.g. native containerization for serverless workload building, executing, deploying, and managing, and infrastructure to allow the programming models to run on any operational model, and
  • etc.,

  or simply said a (distributed) Virtual Machine (VM) or even an (distributed) operating system, which are also (parts of) our OS.

There is no grid computing and no cloud computing and no edge computing and no fog computing anymore, if they were existing at all, and what now comes is something like

or better said

or correctly said

and

(see also the issue SOPR #314 of the 7th of January 2021).

As a consequence, there is

• CHemical Abstract Machine (CHAM),
• blackboard system,
• Multi-Agent System (MAS),
• Space-Based technologies (SBx) in general and Space-Based Architecture (SBA) in particular,
• Service-Oriented technologies (SOx) in general, and microService-Oriented Architecture (mSOA) and as a Service (aaS) capability models and operational models (aaSx) in particular,
• and so on,

This shows once again that our conclusion that the industry has made a full circle from our OS and Evoos to our OS in its simulation of an ordinary progress as camouflage, that it has always realized, is still realizing, and will try to continue to realize our OS by taking our original and unique expression as a blueprint, is quite simply correct.

The rule of thumb is also quite simple in this context: Native in relation to

• execution, computing, networking, virtualization, and Distributed System (DS) is always operating system (os), including Distributed operating system (Dos),
• Service-Oriented technologies (SOx), specifically microService-Oriented Architecture (mSOA), is always Evoos, including os, and
• Grid, Cloud, Edge, and Fog Computing (GCEFC) or as a Service models (aaSx) is always OS, including Evoos, including os.

We investigated the matter related to the Cloud Radio Access Network (Cloud RAN or C-RAN, or virtual RAN or vRAN), operating system-level virtualization, and what is wrongly called microService-Oriented Architecture (mSOA) and Grid, Cloud, Fog, and Edge Computing (GCEFC).

• is based on what is wrongly called Grid, Cloud, Fog, and Edge Computing (GCEFC), as is the case with the so-called Smart Network Fabric with its core cloud and converged edge cloud, and also converged node and other (massive scale) access node, and
• is part of the so-called 5G Future X, also called 5G Next Generation (5G NG), and other wireless communication technologies,

which are included in the common backbone, core network, or fabric of the infrastructures of our SOPR.

Specifically, the integration or joint of Cloud RAN and edge cloud is part of the integration of RAN and GCEFC and therefore it is also part of the common backbone, core network, or fabric of our ON, OW, and OV included in the infrastructures of our SOPR, and managed and orchestrated by our Society for Ontological Performance and Reproduction (SOPR).

All are based on what is called

• enterprise analytics,
• functional use cases (e.g. (work or business process) automation, Information Technology (IT) operations and security, (digital) marketing, workplace, and data), and
• industry verticals (e.g. retail, transportation, health, Electronic Commerce (EC), finance, agriculture, manufacturing),

and

• smart or intelligent GCEFC analytics and
• Machine Learning (ML)

respectively

and therefore

Since the year 2017 the whole crime is busted after more than a decade of investigation, documentation, and clarification.
Since the year 2018 it is crystal clear that what is wrongly called

is our Evoos and OS, which includes our Evoos as its successor, indeed.
Since some months it is also crystal clear that the other side has not stopped with their fraudulent actions, but increased the damages and tried unsuccessfully to create facts all the time and even made their blackmailing visible once again.

But since around the year 2018, the so-called container is dead and being replaced for a container without a (separate) Virtual Machine (VM) respectively a hypercontainer, which is both a container and a VM, as part of

• security,
• performance, and
• flexibility,

which are effectively based on more additions of

• operating system (os), specifically
  • microkernel-based os,
  • capability-based os, and
  • Distributed os (Dos),
• hypervisor, Virtual Machine Monitor (VMM), or virtualizer, specifically
  • type 1, also known as native or bare metal hypervisor, and
  • type 2, also known as hosted hypervisor,
  ,

  as well as

• actor-based system, and
• agent-based system,

and also

which again all are included in our Evolutionary operating system (Evoos) and our Ontologic System (OS) with its integrating Ontologic System Architecture (OSA) and Ontologic System Components (OSC).

We are working on the last details in relation to the management of the exclusive infrastructures of our SOPR, which changed due to the development away from operating system-virtualization or containerization to more

These are some arguments why our SOPR should be or already is in charge.
Handling related technologies and business processes in the scope of the 1st undertaking option can resolve any occurring legal problem.
Howsoever, we are observing the further evolution in the related fields and what will be provided by service providers to other service providers.

Therefore, there will be no never ending

by other companies, so that they are merely becoming our corporation and occupying our market position, but the

as required and demanded pro bono publico==for the public good.

The old tricks of the past will not work so or so. We will not wait until our rights have been infringed and our properties have been stolen once again, but are already proactive acting.

We also decided that the exclusive infrastructures of our SOPR are managed and orchestrated, and operated by our SOPR

We also introduced the 1st undertaking option for activities of main contractors, suppliers, and service providers of our SOPR.

We concluded to not wait anymore, specifically due to the reason that our

have been rejected to a much too large extent.
As one consequence, we are also closing the gaps and doing more clear cuts, for example by reducing the modifications of our original and unique integrating Ontologic System Architecture (OSA) and in this way reducing the scope of the allowance and license for the performance and reproduction of certain parts of our OS or even prohibiting such activities, for example in relation to as a Service (aaS) capability models and operational models (aaSx), including

• Smart Contract as as Service (SCaaS) capability models and operational models (SCaaSx), and
• Blockchain as a Service (BaaS or BlockaaS) capability models and operational models (BaaSx or BlaaSx),

The implications for said latest developments are quite simple and straightforward, but there is no general access to everything of our OS. This is the societal compromise for opening our OS, and allowing and licensing the performance and reproduction of Ontologic Applications and Ontologic Services (OAOS) and the reproduction of certain Ontologic System Components (OSC) and Ontoscope Components (OsC) required for said performance and reproduction of OAOS and also of related works under Fair, Reasonable, And Non-Discriminatory, As well as Customary (FRANDAC) terms and conditions.

aspects and arguments for making or holding exclusive

including the

• Operating system aaSx (OpsaaSx),
• Network aaSx (NaaSx),
• Connectivity Management aaSx (CMaaSx), and
• similar aaSx,

In this regard, the

have to be acknowledged and taken into account.

But we also have the opinion that service platforms based on specific as a Service (aaS) capability models and operational models (aaSx), specifically the

including the

• Operating system aaSx (OpsaaSx),
• Network aaSx (NaaSx),
• Connectivity Management aaSx (CMaaSx), and
• similar aaSx,

and also the

should focus on more specialized and distinctive aaSx anyway, instead of trying to cover as much as possible or even all aaSx. [

The performance and reproduction of certain / sufficient many parts are allowed to do their businesses respectively everything is allowed, that is needed to allow entities / users to put their accrued talents aquired before the end of October 2006 to work in a new and transformative space and time respectively New Reality (NR).
In addition, Ontoverse is at least one metalevel higher than infrastructure, which means that the performance and reproduction of all aaSx should be allowed, but

But one detail point needs further discussion. In the case an entity acts as a main contractor, supplier, and service provider of our SOPR under the 1st undertaking option, which

• Infrastructure aaSx (IaaSx),
• Integration Infrastructure aaSx (IIaaSx),
• Platform aaSx (PaaSx), and
• Integration Platform aaSx (IPaaSx),

  including the

  • Operating system aaSx (OpsaaSx),
  • Network aaSx (NaaSx),
  • Connectivity Management aaSx (CMaaSx), and
  • similar aaSx,

  and also the

• SoftBionics aaSx (SBaaSx),
• Smart Contract aaSx (SCaaSx),
• Blockchain aaSx (BaaSx or BlaaSx), and
• other aaSx

respectively

the customers of said entity are the customers of our SOPR.
The latter means that said entity respectively main contractor, supplier, and service provider must also have the order to handle the customer relation as part of a contract with our SOPR, though this is not going to happen in the P.R.China without being headquartered in the P.R.China. :)

So what is given back, how much is payed more, what more is made exclusive by our SOPR?

The alternative to increase the royalties is to limit the modification of our OS. In this relation, we already said

The other regulations of the AoA and the ToS of our SOPR remain unchanged, including the regulations concerning the establishment of joint ventures, the provision and commission of contracts for main contractors, suppliers, and service providers, and the 3 undertaking options .
As we said, please keep away from the infrastructures, which by the way means all real or physical infrastructures, and all virtual or metaphysical, cybernetical or digital infrastructures respectively all cyber-physical infrastructures, because we now are in the Ontoverse and the New Reality (NR) based on the Caliber/Calibre.
The focus is the user, but not the superuser and our corporation.

Our Ontoverse is based on the Ontologic System Components (OSC) OntoNet, OntoWeb, and OntoVerse, but also OntoScope and OntoBot due to the integration of the fields of

by our integrating Ontologic System Architecture (OSA) with its liquid, molecular, organic (respectively modular, compatible, and so on) property.

There is no layered Ontologic System Architecture (OSA). We only said "OntoLi+-x is build around a special abstraction of a layered system architecture with homogeneous, heterogeneous, synchronous, and also asynchronous modules. Seen as a classical layered reflective agent system [...]" to confuse plagiarists and bad actors.
But we never said that our integrating OSA is a layered architecture, while always talking about an n-dimensional and reflective hypergraph-based integrating architecture based on the field of SoftBionics (SB), including the

and therefore about a hypergraph-based landscape, or better said space of liquid, molecular, organic (respectively modular, compatible, and so on) models, functions, modules, and services based on the fields of

This means that the next thing to discuss is the complete Multimodal Multilingual Multiparadigmatic Multidimensional Multimedia User Interface (MUI), which includes

In this regard, we cannot see why an IPA and related Service-Oriented technologies (SOx) and as a Service models (aaSx) are

for a company, specifically an operating system, service platform, application, or service.

Therefore, we cannot see why

We already said this before in relation to the

and also the

We have already suggested some few times

We also said that we will not make a modification of our OS in relation to the

• universal ledger,
• SOPR Trustee, and
• SOPR Public Trustee,

• Infrastructure aaSx (IaaSx),
• Integration Infrastructure aaSx (IIaaSx),
• Platform aaSx (PaaSx), and
• Integration Platform aaSx (IPaaSx),

  including the

  • Operating system aaSx (OpsaaSx),
  • Network aaSx (NaaSx),
  • Connectivity Management aaSx (CMaaSx), and
  • similar aaSx,

  and also the

• SoftBionics aaSx (SBaaSx),
• Smart Contract aaSx (SCaaSx),
• Blockchain aaSx (BaaSx or BlaaSx), and
• other aaSx.

The complete Cloud Radio Access Network (Cloud RAN or C-RAN, or virtual RAN or vRAN) subarchitecture also looks interesting, specifically because it is part of the

14.April.2021

06:13 UTC+2
Industry 4.0 was created by C.S. as part of OS

We quote a report of a lying public-law broadcaster in F.R.Germany about the related part of our OS, which is wrongly called Industry 4.0: "For the past ten years, the buzzword "Industry 4.0" has characterized the trend of machines being networked and factories being digitized.
[...]
Industry 4.0: the intelligent and networked factory.
[...]
The concept of "Industry 4.0" was invented ten years ago. Today, robots and the like are part of everyday life in many factories [...]."

Comment
There is absolutely no doubt that the field called Industry 4.0 and Industrial Internet of Things (IIoT) is a part of our original and unique, copyrighted, and prohibited for fair use work of art titled Ontologic System, created by C.S. in the years 1999 to 2006, and exclusively managed and exploited by our Society for Ontological Performance and Reproduction (SOPR) with the consent and on the behalf of C.S., which includes

which are the foundations and hence characteristics of Industry 4.0 and IIoT.

Obviously, the field is at least 15 years or even 22 years old already.

By the way:

00:47, 01:19, 23:25 , and 25:50 UTC+2
Ontonics Blitz Fund I #18.4.8

We would like to share some more informations about the outstanding features of our electric energy storage technology, also known as battery, of our Superbolt #4 Electric Power (EP) of our Blitz Fund I and related activities.

EP high-performance batteries have been specifically designed for all kinds of systems and utilizations, specifically with increased and even the highest power demands.
EP batteries are highly recommended for all entities, that

• large device,
• high-performance device, or
• large number of devices,

or

The positive features of EP batteries include:

For example, the

Even if the casing is damaged or broken, the content remains bound in the PowerBottle™, PowerCan™, PowerKeg™, PowerCylinder™, and PowerCartridge™. An uncontrolled escape of battery content can therefore be largely ruled out.

In addition, the

These outstanding properties for a high-performance battery also adds to its usefullness.

For example, it reduces the

Furthermore, our business unit Electric Power (EP) is also moving swiftly into the market segments of emergency power systems and backup battery systems, which are required for

which again are based on or benefit from an own electric power supply.
We are expecting to take over these market segments just right from the start as well.

We are also working on a slightly different variant of the 51% ownership regulation, also known as Chinese win-win policy and could also be called 51% deal or agreement, in relation to our business unit EP, that we would like to submit to the government of the P.R.China.

In more detail, this variant does not require the establishment of a joint venture between

but

In this way, foreign companies, specifically vehicle manufacturers without having their true headquarters in the P.R.China, but also Chinese companies would be motivated even more to respect the rights and properties (e.g. copyright) of C.S. and our corporation, as well as to comply with the Fair, Reasonable, And Non-Discriminatory, As well as Customary (FRANDAC) terms and conditions of our societies inside and outside the P.R.China. :)
It is not that easy to copy and steal our plans anymore.

In fact, this is even a global win-win, as always in what we do. :)

Superunicorns - Superbolts - Superpowers

15.April.2021

Comment of the Day

SpeechSpace™
MapSpace™
AutoSpace™
BikeSpace™
PlaneSpace™
ShipSpace™
AutoMapSpace™
CarSpace™
RobotSpace™
DroneSpace™

Style of Speed Further steps

Our clouds respectively central platforms included in the Hyper Connectivity System (HCS), such as for example the

• SpeechCloud,
• MapCloud,
• AutoCloud,
• BikeCloud,
• PlaneCloud,
• ShipCloud,
• AutoMapCloud,
• CarCloud,
• RobotCloud,
• DroneCloud,
• etc.,

become (time-)spaces or space(-time)s, such as for example the

• SpeechSpace,
• MapSpace
• AutoSpace,
• BikeSpace,
• PlaneSpace,
• ShipSpace,
• AutoMapSpace
• CarSpace,
• RobotSpace,
• DroneSpace,
• etc..

17.April.2021

01:33 UTC+2
Clarification

In the comment No debate in relation to legal certainty of the 16th of April 2021 (yesterday) we mentioned that "Google Earth Timelapse is another copyright and competition infringement, if not licensed correctly. In fact, we showed this feature of our OntoEarth based on our Caliber/Calibre and our knowledge graph of our original and unique, copyrighted, and prohibited for fair use work of art titled Ontologic System, created by C.S., and exclusively managed and exploited by our Society for Ontological Performance and Reproduction (SOPR) with the consent and on the behalf of C.S. [...]."

But missing was the link, where we showed the screenshots of the project called Virtual Time Machine of an unknown Japanese research institute or entity:

See the

but also the

Obviously, this has to be viewed and understood in the much broader context of our

than in the context of only an operating system (os).
In fact, Google only animated certain series of images (see the images on a green line of the Virtual Time Machine).

We do apologize for this next verbal trick to trick out fraudulent plagiarists, serious criminals, and other bad actors. But we never said something else than that our OS is a higher thing.

Please note that all

00:33 UTC+2
Ontonics Blitz Fund I #19.9.3

Just as being responsible for the breakthroughs of so many technologies, for example the

our business unit Style of Speed (SoS) with its spin-off business unit respectively our Superbolt #9 Space Technologies (SX) is also the true force behind the recent projects, which have the goal to go back to the moon again and establish a moon station.

While fine-tuning our truly innovative and revolutionary solutions, our SX got access to a complete lunar lander by happenstance.
Now, we are looking, if and what we could reuse and adapt of it for our spaceships and space explorations.
But there might be some minor optimizations only due to our much more advanced SX. In fact, rocket science and tin cans are the focus at the NASA and its breastfeeded pseudo-subsidiary Space Exploration Technologies (Space ExiT). In total contrast, we here at SoS and SX are researching and developing, putting science-fiction into practice, as well as implementing and producing hightech to win.

18.April.2021

09:55 UTC+2
Ontonics Blitz Fund I #20

We are working on another deal or agreement in relation to one of our new business units respectively Superbolts, that we would like to submit to the government of the P.R.China.

In more detail,

In this way, foreign companies, specifically manufacturers without having their true headquarters in the P.R.China, but also Chinese companies would be motivated even more to respect the rights and properties (e.g. copyright) of C.S. and our corporation, as well as to comply with the Fair, Reasonable, And Non-Discriminatory, As well as Customary (FRANDAC) terms and conditions of our societies inside and outside the P.R.China. :)
It is not that easy to copy and steal our plans anymore.

In fact, this is even another global win-win, as always in what we do. :)

Superunicorns - Superbolts - Superpowers

19.April.2021

10:00 UTC+2
Ontonics Ontolab Vision Fund I # 4.y.1

In relation to at least one of our variants of a technology of our Superunicorn #y *** we are now even more certain to have reached another outstanding goal.
In fact, with every further development our solutions have matured more and more and their performances have been confirmed even more.
We have even started the next generation 2.0 some months ago, including

In more detail, we reviewed a technology, which is 100% scientifically sound and has been shown to work in the laboratories, but not in a way, that would make sense for practical utilization.

We knew that we have solutions for the remaining problem in our stock, which we developed in the last years in relation to other undisclosed fascinating stuff. But at first, we were only 99% sure, but not 100% if the first solution would be suitable or if another one would be the right choice.
Howsoever, the first solution works and the second solution will do so as well.

The state of the art is 80% respectively 20% below breakeven point (100%). We increased that by half (120%) or even doubled that (160%), and simultaneously even kept it cold so to say at room-temperature again.

Top Secret - Only for protectors of our rights and properties (e.g. copyright)

Superunicorns - Superbolts - Superpowers

22.April.2021

13:01 UTC+2
Ontonics Further steps

We have only touched the next proposal of the European Commission (EC) of the European Union (EU) in relation to the utilization of SoftBionics (SB) (Artificial Intelligence (AI), Machine Learning (ML), Computer Vision (CV), Simultaneous Localization And Mapping (SLAM), Cognitive Agent System (CAS), Multi-Agent System (MAS), Evolutionary Computing (EC), Swarm Intelligence (SI) or Swarm Computing (SC), etc.).
We will come back to this topic in the next future.

Another hot topic are the activities of the lawmakers and watchdogs in relation to illegal monopolies in the U.S.America, P.R.China, European Union, India, Australia, and so on.
Please note that a monopoly is not illegal in general and the

For sure, there are certain limits of these rights of an individual entity in relation to the requirements and the demands of the public, specifically the

pro bono publico==for the public good.
But this also holds vice verse for these matters of the public in relation to the basic rights of an individual member of the public.

We also note that high-technology is politicized, which is always bad, because it never worked well, but shows the deficits of democracies, specifically the many loopholes and interpretations of laws and norms due to the lack of rule-based law and order. In this regard, we already suggested to establish high-class high-tech corporate political parties.

As always, the devil is in the detail.

27.April.2021

14:05 UTC+2
Comment of the Day

"If a business is built on misleading users, on data exploitation, on choices that are no choices at all, it does not deserve our praise. It deserves reform.", [Tim Cook, Chief Executive Officer (CEO) of the company Apple, Keynote speech at Europe's Computers, Privacy and Data Protection (CPDP) conference, 28th of January 2021]

We will take T. Cook at his own words, specifically in relation to our rights and properties.

28.April.2021

14:44 UTC+2
Investigations::Multimedia, AI and KM

'The technology is now in line with the futurologists'
"The technology is now in line with the futurologists," [another bandwagon jumper] said. A decade ago, he added, "you'd never (have) imagined that someone could order food or turn the lights on just by talking to an object, and that's quickly become part of a very familiar landscape."
Some of the biggest advancements have been made in computing power, sensor size and speech and natural language recognition, according to [an MIT professor]. But our devices are poised to respond to far more than voice commands. Ambient technology will be sensitive to our movement, gaze, posture, body language, heat biometrics, and the nuances in our tone of voice, [another bandwagon jumper] said.
At the Consumer Electronics Show (CES) in 2020, Panasonic unveiled a new its variant of our concept based on activity-sensing technology that is designed to predict your behavior around the home, including biometric sensors that adjust room temperature based on your body heat.
Chinese home appliance brand Haier, meanwhile, showcased a concept for a flexible and accessible kitchen that can adjust the height of appliances, among other features, by using voice and facial recognition to determine who is using it.
[Image caption:] Samsung's smart refrigerators can help people plan their meals based on their dietary needs, as well as what's left in their fridge. Other kitchen concepts imagine an even more personalized and automated experience.
[...]
The [trend forecasting company] report details how our living spaces will be increasingly digitized and able to change up visually or aurally according to our moods, using augmented reality (AR) and deep learning SoftBionics (SB), which [a head of consumer technology] suggests could lead to a creative boom when it comes to home decor. IKEA has provided a[nother] glimpse into what our homes might soon be capable of through its project "Everyday Experiments" with [a] design lab [...], proposing blinds that adjust themselves according to the sun, or an AR and spatial audio app that turns the objects in your home into a musical symphony by scanning and assigning each of them a sound, which can be changed by rearranging objects, among other concepts.
"The idea that a designer can design a mood, or design an ambience is a fantastic thing," [a head of consumer technology] said. "So thinking about how all of the senses come together is going to be really inspiring for designers -- how do they pair lighting with color and with sound and with pattern and tactility?"
"I think that digital decor could become a sustainable way to update your space, if you have furnishings that you can change digitally by projecting color or light onto them," she added.
And, though it may have been too early for the classical beginner failures were made repeated once again with smart glasses when Google Glass was introduced back in 2013, a number of AR glasses on the horizon -- reportedly including Apple and Facebook [and many other companies] -- will mean that soon enough, anything in or outside of the home may become interactive and responsive.

Privacy in a world of intimate technology
But all of this innovation could come at a cost: our privacy. And in the current landscape, it's a fee consumers may be reticent to pay. "With the big backlash against Big Tech that we've seen over the past few years, I think consumers... have a certain level of interest in privacy and ethics now that they didn't before," [a head of consumer technology] said.
These fears aren't entirely unfounded. Massive breaches to major websites have compromised the data of hundreds of millions of people in the past few years, and the comprehensive data ambient technology relies on will include far more than our addresses and credit card numbers. The digital assistant that will be able to identify when you''ll be most attentive for a Spanish lesson -- a function [an MIT scientist] said is being heavily researched -- will have the type of information that could be used to manipulate you.
"We can start looking at your internal state: Are you focused? Is this the best time to give you this information now?" [an MIT scientist] said. "If you have intimate knowledge of people, you can start knowing exactly how to make an intervention to sway them."
While we are now accustomed to hyper-targeted product advertising, the Cambridge Analytica scandal, which saw Facebook user data harvested and exploited for political advertising, portends a future where it may become much easier to use people's personal preferences for much more than purchasing decisions.
[A head of consumer technology] also notes smart home features could soon extend beyond just your home. Amazon Sidewalk, for instance, will be rolling out soon, offering the ability to create smart neighborhoods by allowing connected devices to work beyond the range of a single home's Wi-Fi, including home security systems, broadening their potential reach.
But [a head of consumer technology] says technology meant to connect people also has the potential to exacerbate inequalities. She points out racial profiling that has taken place on some neighborhood social networking apps [...] as foreshadowing to what may follow. The app has been criticized for allowing users to report people they see in their neighborhood as "suspicious" based only on their race. The company has tried to address the issue with several features, including a new "anti-racism notification" that identifies offensive phrases and asks users to reconsider before they post.
"(The racism is) almost amplified by the technology... And so that will need to be tackled as well for consumers to feel like these systems are equitable and that they're democratic."
Identifying these problems will become crucial as more people opt in to relinquishing their tasks to ambient technology. In a world with billions and billions of connected devices that learn us intimately to streamline our lives, it will be harder to opt out. "I think it will become more and more of a luxury to be unconnected," [a head of consumer technology] said.
But [an MIT scientist] takes a more optimistic tone, referring to sci-fi writers who have opined about the collective intelligence humans will be capable of when more fully linked.
"(Ambient technology) is going to really unite us with machine intelligence and each other, ideally, in a way, that's great," [an MIT scientist] said. "I like to take the long view, and something like that would be wonderful.""

Comment
Obviously, the fields of ubiquitous computing, ambient intelligence, and responsive environment as part of the fields of Internet of Things of the first generation (IoT 1.0) and Ubiquitous Computing of the first generation (UbiC 1.0) were the visions respectively are the outdated visions of yesterday.
Already now our vision respectively imagination and creation of the future already presented at the end of October and the beginning of November of the year 2006 with the original and unique, copyrighted, and prohibited for fair use work of art titled Ontologic System and created by C.S. with its Ontologic Applications and Ontoverse, which add all senses, proactive capabilities, user habits, and Mediated Reality (MedR), as well as much more.

Thanks to our original and unique, copyrighted, and prohibited for fair use masterpieces and groundworks of art included in the oeuvre of C.S. and developed over more than 2 decades ago, but not only over the last decade, as another bandwagon jumper claimed deliberately and fraudulently to mislead the public, we will see an explosion in ambient technology as part of the fields of

We can also see with the issues of safety and security, as well as governence and protection of digital rights and properties once again why our Society for Ontological Performance and Reproduction (SOPR) and other Societies are required and are the only entities able to get the task done.

By the way:

• research institutes and scientists,
• media companies and journalists, and
• other entities

do not reference our AWs and further IPs as it is required by national and international laws, regulations, and acts, as well as agreements.

SOPR #323

*** Sketching mode ***
Topics
This issue is focused on the infrastructure, specifically the common fabric and the Ontoverse (Ov):

Infrastucture [Common Spacetime Fabric]

Infrastructure [Ontoverse] or Ontoverse

29.April.2021

SOPR #324

*** Work in progress - better structure and wording ***
Topics
More about these topics:

Legal matter
Instead of a change or transformation of the status quo and the societal structures of politics, economics, etc., which is one of the many expressions of the OS, the status quo and the societal structures of politics, economics, etc. are changed or transformed to the OS, which is unwanted. A modification would allow bad action, hate, and disharmony, but the OS is for good action, love, and harmony.
Thus, the basis neither for a solution pro bono publico nor for an out-of-court agreement regarding legal regulations, safety guarantees, and legal certainty, which are in the public interest, no longer exists.

In particular, in a kind of negotiation phase, they neither communicated directly with us nor adhered to basic conditions for opening our Ontologic System on the basis of allowinng and licensing the performance and reproduction of certain parts of our OS. Instead, they continued to violate rights, steal property, and ultimately continue to screw us over lock, stock, and barrel.
With this, the basis for a solution pro bono publico is no longer given, as it is no longer for an out-of-court agreement regarding legally ... , which are in the public interest.
In addition, with an effectively not given 100% legal certainty in relation to the rights and properties (e.g. copyright) of C.S. and our corporation, we have to handle the situation accordingly.
The terms and conditions remain, they remain even FRANDAC, but follow the industry standard, which means to hold and exercise the exclusive right to perform and reproduce, and also monetize an AW, for example as a so-called walled garden and by demanding a customary ICT royalty of 15 to 30%.

Legal matter [Joint ventures]

License Model (LM)
First of all, we would like to recall that shopping apps are not for free

Furthermore, we are still balancing out the LM structure
15, 20, 25% plus progression of up to 10% for ICT licensee class with all discounts granted
10%, 15%, 20% plus bonus

We have discussed the matter from multiple points of view multiple times.
for entities with headquarters in the member states of the Five Eyes intelligence alliance and the P.R.China
If it applies for entities with headquarters in the EU is a matter of ongoing observation and investigation, but might become effective as well.

Companies have to increase their prices, so that inflation is restored and the central banks can stop with QE and increase the basic terms once again.