Legal matter
We said to be neutral in general. Therefore, we are not (lexicographical order) Team Alphabet (Google), Team Amazon, Team Apple, Team Microsoft, Team Volkswagen, and so on, but Team SOPR or simply SOPR.

We get all of our rights, properties, reputations, and momenta, as well as follow-up opportunities back.

Until the end of last year, we have not separated the

in relation to an out-of-court agreement.
If no complete restitution respectively retransition of power of control (ownership), then public legal matter.

original and unique ArtWorks (AWs) and further Intellectual Properties (IPs)

But some further IPs have to be viewed and classified as AWs due to

• Merriam Webster Dictionary: "a substantial body of work constituting the lifework of a writer, an artist, or a composer"
• Online encyclopedia: "The term oeuvre is used to describe the complete body of work completed by an artist throughout a career.[2 [Oeuvre Merriam Webster Dictionary]]"
• English Language Learners Definition ": all the works that a writer, an artist, or a composer has created"]

The idea is to mix the retransition of power of control (a characteristic of ownership) as part of the reconstitution, restoration, and restitution of all of the rights, properties, reputations, and momenta, as well as follow-up opportunities of C.S. and our corporation. In this way, ownership is clearly and legally separated in a formal part and a practical part respectively management and execution according to a cyclic process of Total Quality Management (TQM), so to say, and therefore there must be

It is a stronger guarantee or power of control than giving a license and revoking a license preventing attempts of undermining our Society for Ontological Performance and Reproduction (SOPR). Walled gardens around our walled garden, become ornamentally walled parcels within our walled garden, though they are already plots in the legal scope of ... the OntoLand.

AWs

• 8%, 13%, 18% plus progression and 7.333333333% for hardware goods, or
• 10%, 15%, 20% plus progression and 8% for hardware goods

with all discounts granted.

For sure, Proposal for Digital Market Act (PfDMA) has only meaning outside the legal scope of ... the OntoLand, because business processes of main contractors, suppliers, and service providers of our SOPR are activities of C.S. and our corporation (1st undertaking option; see section Legal matter [3 undertaking options] of the issue SOPR #314 of the 7th of January 2021).
competition is guaranteed on the level of our

Common competition for customers on the free market becomes common competition for main contracts in relation to IaaS and PaaS, etc..
The work does not become less.
For companies nothing changes with the exception of power of control in relation to IaaS and PaaS, etc..

{handle as proposed (see for example issue #306 of the 26th of October 2020) or other way?} IPs
industry standard copyright and patent right
Different situation with further IPs. Therefore, at least required are

illegal exploitation of monopoly must be avoided.

License Model (LM)
{old License Model (LM) or new LM?} The position of certain entities has become obvious. They have chosen to continue a cold war against

that does not agree with the believes and views, and do not submit to the rules of the related governments and their cliques.

For entities with headquarter :

European Union [Measures]
permanent solo efforts of member states

Greece, Denmark, Austria, F.R.Germany [Measures]
permanent solo efforts of countries

U.S.America [Measures]
no prohibition of Ponzi schemes and anonymous digital and virtual currencies, like for example Bitcoin and Co.,
continued damaging of goals and even threatening of integrity

Israel [Measures]
permanent solo efforts of country

Ontologic System Economy (OSE)
With our original and unique work of art titled Ontologic System and created by C.S. we are bridging the gap in many areas.
Multilingual voice-enabled Electronic Commerce (EC) platforms, voice assistants, virtual assistants, as well as other Ontologic Applications and Ontologic Services (OAOS) enabled by our 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), Swarm Intelligence (SI) or Swarm Computing (SC), etc.) with for example our exclusive SoftBionics as a Service (SBaaS) capability models and operational models, which have the capability to understand variations and dialects within a language, like for example in India and elsewhere, are not unlocking the Internet economy, but are implementing the related parts of our OS and realizing our Ontologic Economic System (OES).

Ontologic Bank [Special Purpose Akquisition Company (SPAC)]
Our Ontologic Bank (OntoBank) will establish an own Special Purpose Akquisition Company (SPAC), if required.

Ontologic Bank [Digital and virtual currencies]
We would like to recall the three points why illegal virtual currencies, like for example Bitcoin, Ether, derivatives, etc., were never relevant and will be stopped:

and of course in all three points according to C.S., who made all these considerations already around the year 2002 and then improved the smart contract transaction protocol, the blockchain technique, and the related technologies based on them by adding for example the basic properties of (mostly) being reflective, and validated and verified, and therefore also (mostly) being validatable and verifiable, and validating and verifying, and created more solutions for their foundational problems as part of our Ontologic System Architecture (OSA). C.S. also created and designed the blockchain based on

• swarm computing and
• volunteer computing

and

Therefore, C.S. enjoys the copyright protection for these solutions as part of our original and unique OS, including the foundations of related

We do not know why there are still some entities claiming, for example a director of a school of finance & management and media companies, that the problems are often exaggerated and there would be no regulation for illegal cryptocurrencies.

Social and Societal System (S³)
The Media News Barging Code of the Austrialian government confirmed our

though more and more of them are even some kind of platform providers of the News as a Service (NaaS or NewsaaS) and Media as a Service (MaaS) capability models and hence entities in the licensee class with at least the highest royalties (see the section Social and Societal System (S³) of the issue #315 of the 5th of February 2021).

02.March.2021

Clarification

In fact, a QR code and a related QR tag are not required in pure virtual environments, but only in digital environments as interface between the real or physical world and the virtual or cybernetical world. For example,

Applications for stationary and mobile devices can do this actively without manual action by an end user (e.g. showing of QR code tag or scanning of QR code tag). This is also the reason why our Ontologic System is able to handle QR code as well, for sure, but our Internet of Things (IoT) example is based on RFID and other Near-Field Communication (NFC) technologies and other wireles network technologies.
As we explained with other applications utilized for contact tracing, the handling of QR code is merely an obsolete step. A simple message that an exchange of data or information

is sufficient.

By the way: Applications based on QR code are no means to circumvent our rights related to our Ontologic System. Ultimately, the mobile devices are already based on Ontoscope Components (OsC) or executed on Ontologic System Components (OSC) in all known cases.
In addition, the clause or rule All or nothing at all applies, which we added to the Articles of Association (AoA) and the Terms of Services (ToS) of our Society for Ontological Performance and Reproduction (SOPR) to prevent all those cheap tricks in this regard.

07.March.2021

08:53, 11:20, and 21:44 UTC+1
Clarification or
Investigations::Multimedia, AI and KM

*** Work in progress - final summary not ready ***
We have taken a quick look at the field of Business Process Automation (BPA) and its subfield Robotic Process Automation (RPA), specifically in relation to our original and unique work of art titled Ontologic System, our field of SoftBionics (SB), and our SoftBionics as a Service (SBaaS) capability and operational models, which were all created by C.S..

At first we quote the webpages about Information Technology Service Management (ITSM) and Business Process Automation (BPA) of an online encyclopedia for better understanding of the overall subject matters.
Then we quote the webpage about Robotic Process Automation (RPA) of an online encyclopedia.
After these quotes, we also quote some reports, which were citied in the webpages of said online encyclopedia quoted before.

We quote an online encyclopedia about the subject Information Technology Service Management (ITSM): "Information technology service management (ITSM) are the activities that are performed by an organization to design, plan, deliver, operate and control information technology (IT) services offered to customers.[1]
Differing from more technology-oriented IT management approaches like network management and IT systems management,[2] IT service management is characterized by adopting a process approach towards management, focusing on customer needs and IT services for customers rather than IT systems, and stressing continual improvement. The CIO WaterCoolers' annual ITSM report states that business uses ITSM "mostly in support of customer experience (35%) and service quality (48%)."[3]

Context
As a discipline, ITSM has ties and common interests with other IT and general management approaches, information security management and software engineering. Consequently, IT service management frameworks have been influenced by other standards and adopted concepts from them, e.g. CMMI, ISO 9000, or ISO/IEC 27000.[4]"

We quote an online encyclopedia about the subject Business Process Automation (BPA): "Business process automation (BPA), also known as business automation or digital transformation,[1] is the technology-enabled automation of complex business processes.[2] It can streamline a business for simplicity, achieve digital transformation, increase service quality, improve service delivery or contain costs. It consists of integrating applications, restructuring labor resources and using software applications throughout the organization.[3] Robotic process automation is an emerging field within BPA.

Deployment
BPAs can be implemented in a number of business areas including marketing, sales and workflow. Toolsets vary in sophistication, but there is an increasing trend towards the use of artificial intelligence technologies that can understand natural language and unstructured data sets, interact with human beings, and adapt to new types of problems without human-guided training.[4 [From Process Automation To Autonomous Process. [14th of February 2020]]] BPA providers tend to focus on different industry sectors but their underlying approach tends to be similar in that they will attempt to provide the shortest route to automation by exploiting the user interface layer rather than going deeply into the application code or databases sitting behind them. They also simplify their own interface to the extent that these tools can be used directly by non-technically qualified staff. The main advantage of these toolsets is therefore their speed of deployment, the drawback is that it brings yet another IT supplier to the organization.[5]

A business process management implementation
A business process management system is quite different from BPA. However, it is possible to build automation on the back of a BPM implementation. The actual tools to achieve this vary, from writing custom application code to using specialist BPA tools. The advantages and disadvantages of this approach are inextricably linked - the BPM implementation provides an architecture for all processes in the business to be mapped, but this in itself delays the automation of individual processes and so benefits may be lost in the meantime.[6 [Whatever Happened To Business Process Management Software? [15th of January 2019]]]

Robotic process automation [(RPA)]
The practice of performing robotic process automation (RPA) results in the deployment of attended or unattended software agents to an organization's environment. These software agents, or robots, are deployed to perform pre-defined structured and repetitive sets of business tasks or processes: The goal is for humans to focus on more productive tasks, while the software agents handle the repetitive ones, such as billing.[7] Artificial intelligence software robots are deployed to handle unstructured data sets (like images, texts, audios) and are deployed after performing and deploying robotic process automation: They can, for instance, populate an automatic transcript from a video. The combination of automation and intelligence (AI) brings autonomy for the robots, along with the capability in mastering cognitive tasks:[8 [From Process Automation To Autonomous Process. [14th of February 2020]]] At this stage, the robot is able to learn and improve the processes by analyzing and adapting them.[9 ["Intelligent Process Automation: The 4 Levels of AI-Enablement. [15th of February 2018]]]"

We quote an online encyclopedia about the subject Robotic Process Automation (RPG): "Robotic process automation (or RPA) is a form of business process automation technology based on metaphorical software robots (bots) or on artificial intelligence (AI)/digital workers.[1] It is sometimes referred to as software robotics (not to be confused with robot software).
In traditional workflow automation tools, a software developer produces a list of actions to automate a task and interface to the back-end system using internal application programming interfaces (APIs) or dedicated scripting language. In contrast, RPA systems develop the action list by watching the user perform that task in the application's graphical user interface (GUI), and then perform the automation by repeating those tasks directly in the GUI. This can lower the barrier to use of automation in products that might not otherwise feature APIs for this purpose.
RPA tools have strong technical similarities to graphical user interface testing tools. These tools also automate interactions with the GUI, and often do so by repeating a set of demonstration actions performed by a user. RPA tools differ from such systems in that they allow data to be handled in and between multiple applications, for instance, receiving email containing an invoice, extracting the data, and then typing that into a bookkeeping system.

Historic evolution
[...]
As a form of automation, the concept has been around for a long time in the form of screen scraping, which can be traced back to early forms of malware. However, RPA is much more extensible, consisting of API integration into other enterprise applications, connectors into [Information Technology Service Management (]ITSM[)] systems, terminal services and even some types of AI SoftBionic (SB) (e.g. [Artificial Intelligence (AI),] Machine Learning [(ML), and Computer Vision (CV)]) services such as image recognition. It is considered to be a significant technological evolution in the sense that new software platforms are emerging which are sufficiently mature, resilient, scalable and reliable to make this approach viable for use in large enterprises[2 [Robotic Automation Emerges as a Threat to Traditional Low-Cost Outsourcing. [October 2012]] (who would otherwise be reluctant due to perceived risks to quality and reputation).
A principal barrier to the adoption of self-service is often technological: it may not always be feasible or economically viable to retro-fit new interfaces onto existing systems. Moreover, organisations may wish to layer a variable and configurable set of process rules on top of the system interfaces which may vary according to market offerings and the type of customer. This only adds to the cost and complexity of the technological implementation. Robotic automation software provides a pragmatic means of deploying new services in this situation, where the robots simply mimick the behaviour of humans to perform the back end transcription or processing. The relative affordability of this approach arises from the fact that no IT new transformation or investment is required; instead the software robots simply leverage greater use out of existing IT assets.

Deployment
The hosting of RPA services also aligns with the metaphor of a software robot, with each robotic instance having its own virtual workstation, much like a human worker. The robot uses keyboard and mouse controls to take actions and execute automations. Normally all of these actions take place in a virtual environment and not on screen; the robot does not need a physical screen to operate, rather it interprets the screen display electronically. The scalability of modern solutions based on architectures such as these owes much to the advent of virtualization technology, without which the scalability of large deployments would be limited by available capacity to manage physical hardware and by the associated costs. The implementation of RPA in business enterprises has shown dramatic cost savings when compared to traditional non-RPA solutions.[3]
There are however several risks with RPA. Criticism include risks of stifling innovation and creating a more complex maintenance environment of existing software that now needs to consider the use of graphical user interfaces in a way they weren't intended to be used.[4] "

Impact on employment
[...]

RPA actual deployment

[...]

Robotic process automation 2.0
Robotic process automation 2.0, sometimes to as "unassisted RPA" or RPAAI,[13 [Evolution of Robotic Process Automation (RPA): The Path to Cognitive RPA. [29th of August 2018)]]][14] is the next generation of RPA related technologies. Technological advancements and improvements around artificial intelligence technologies are making it easier for businesses to take advantage of the benefits of RPA without dedicating a large budget for development work.
While unassisted RPA has a number of benefits, it is not without drawbacks. Utilizing unassisted RPA, a process can be run on a computer without needing input from a user, freeing up that user to do other work. However, in order to be effective, very clear rules need to be established in order for the processes to run smoothly.

Hyperautomation
Hyperautomation is the application of advanced technologies like RPA, Artificial Intelligence [(AI)], [M]achine [L]earning (ML) and Process Mining to augment workers and automate processes in ways that are significantly more impactful than traditional automation capabilities.[15][16][17 [Hyperautomation among top 10 technology trends for 2020. [21st of October 2019]]] Hyperautomation is the combination of automation tools to deliver work.[18]
[A consultancy agency]'s report notes that this trend was kicked off with robotic process automation (RPA). The report notes that, "RPA alone is not hyperautomation. Hyperautomation requires a combination of tools to help support replicating pieces of where the human is involved in a task."[19 [... Top 10 Strategic Technology Trends For 2020. [21st of November 2019]]]

Outsourcing
Back office clerical processes outsourced by large organisations - particularly those sent offshore - tend to be simple and transactional in nature, requiring little (if any) analysis or subjective judgement. This would seem to make an ideal starting point for organizations beginning to adopt robotic automation for the back office. Client organisations may choose to take outsourced processes back "in house" from their Business Process Outsourcing (BPO) providers, thus representing a threat to the future of the BPO business,[20 [IT Robots May Mean the End of Offshore Outsourcing. [16th of November 2012]]] or whether the BPOs implement such automations on their clients' behalf may well depend on a number of factors.
[...]

Examples

We quote an online encyclopedia about the company Blue Prism: "Blue Prism is the trading name of the Blue Prism Group [...] that pioneered and makes enterprise robotic process automation (RPA) software that provides a digital workforce designed to automate complex, end-to-end operational activities.
[...]

History
Formation
Blue Prism was founded in 2001 by a group of process automation experts to develop technology that could be used to improve the efficiency and effectiveness of organisations.[5 [Blue Prism is raising $130M to fuel new technologies. [24th of January 2019]]] Initially their focus was on the back office where they recognised an enormous unfulfilled need for automation. The company was co-founded by Alastair Bathgate and David Moss to provide a new approach that today is known as robotic process automation, or RPA.[6 [Blue Prism looks to partners to expand robotic process automation with AI. [24th of January 2019]]]
In 2003, Blue Prism's first commercial product, Automate, was launched. In 2005, the second version of Automate was released with features for large scale processing. Co-operative Financial Services began using Blue Prism software in 2005 to automate manual processes in customer services.[7 [Co-operative bank extends automation with Blue Prism. [29th of August 2007]] (see the third report quoted below)]

Robotic Process Automation [(RPA)]
Robotic process automation (RPA) is the application of technology that provides organizations with a digital workforce that follows rule-based business processes and interacts with the organizations' systems in the same way that existing users currently do.[8 [Service Automation: Robots and The Future of Work [2016].]][9][10 [How is technology changing [Business Process Outsourcing (]BPO[)]? [June 2012]]][11 [Robotic Automation Emerges as a Threat to Traditional Low Cost Outsourcing. [October 2012] (see the second report quoted below)][12 [Understanding Enterprise RPA: The Blue Prism Example. [2016]]][13 [A new approach to automating services. [October 2016]] (includes and references no prior art)][14] Blue Prism has been credited for coining the term "Robotic Process Automation."[6 [24th of January 2019]][15 [11th of September 2019]]
RPA is a growing industry and is expected to reach $3.11 billion by 2025.[16 [Robotic Process Automation (RPA) Market Worth $3.11 Billion by 2025.] (see the comment and the sixth report quoted below)] [...]

[...]
[...] In June 2017, Blue Prism announced that a new version of its software would run on public clouds such as Amazon Web Services, Microsoft Azure, and Google Cloud Platform. Previously, the software had run on customers' own servers.[28 [[]]]
In 2019, Blue Prism announced changes to its platform and the issuing of new stock. It included a new AI engine, an updated marketplace for extensions, and a new lab for in-house AI innovation.[29]
[...]

Blue Prism technology
Blue Prism is built on the Microsoft .NET Framework. [...] Blue prism records every system login, change in management action, and decisions and actions taken by the robots to identify statistics and real-time operational analytics.[34] [...] All of the process coding is automated on the back end, allowing even non-technical users to automate a process by dragging components into an interface.[35]
In 2016, Blue Prism received one of the top honors at the [...] Awards, named as The Best Enterprise Application of AI.[36][37] [...]
In 2019, Blue Prism announced its idea for connected-RPA. Connected-RPA is the offering of an automation platform with AI and cognitive features built in.[39 [Blue Prism launches connected-RPA to transform the market. [25th of January 2019]]] It includes features like a Digital Exchange, with online access to drag and drop AI, machine learning, and cognitive and disruptive technologies; a web-based tool that reduces the time to prepare for a RPA deployment; [...].[39] The Digital Exchange gives customers and partners the ability to create and share tools that can be used with Blue Prism's software. To encourage innovation, Blue Prism has an AI engine for building connectors to advanced AI tools from Amazon, Google, IBM, and other AI platforms.[40 [Blue Prism looks to partners to expand robotic process automation with AI. [24th of January 2019]] (see the third report quoted below)]
In the summer of 2019, Blue Prism acquired Thoughtonomy [...].[41] Thoughtonomy was later renamed Blue Prism Cloud. The acquisition provided Blue Prism with Cloud capabilities, allowing them to offer Automation as a Service over the cloud.

The digital workforce
Blue Prism's digital workforce is built, managed and owned by the user or customer, spanning operations and technology, adhering to an enterprise-wide robotic operating model. It is code-free[42] and can automate any software in a non-invasive way. The digital workforce can be applied to automate processes in any department where clerical or administrative work is performed across an organisation.[43]

Business and markets
[...]

Blue Prism Ventures
In 2021, Blue Prism launched Blue Prism Ventures which helps venture partners find collaboration opportunities within the field of software robotic process automation.[51] [...] [52 [Blue Prism launches venture fund to expand global use of cloud RPA. [8th of January 2021]]]"

Comment
This content has been fabricated to mislead the public. For example, the idea of the so-called connected-RPA is included in our OS as well. Furthermore, the reference "8. Service Automation: Robots and The Future of Work [2016]" does not give the date 2016 despite it is part of the title of the cited book. That was definitely no happenstance. We also have more and more dead links of relatively young webpages. That is unusual.
We have not found any evidence that supports the claim related to the term robotic automation and robotic process automation.
We are also classifying the Automation as a Service (AaaS) model, which is on the same level like the Integration Platform as a Service (IPaaS) capability and operational models.
The report referenced as "16. Robotic Process Automation (RPA) Market Worth $3.11 Billion by 2025" has been substituted with the new report titled "Robotic Process Automation Market Worth $25.56 Billion By 2027" in July 2020, which is about RPAAI.

We quote an online encyclopedia about the company Automation Anywhere: "Automation Anywhere is a developer of robotic process automation (RPA) software, which employs software bots to complete business processes.[9][10 [Why SoftBank Invested $300 Million In Robotic Process Automation (RPA). [3rd of July 2019]]][11]

History
According to CEO Mihir Shukla, Automation Anywhere was originally founded as Tethys Solutions, LLC[12 [San Jose automation unicorn catapults to $6.8B valuation with Salesforce-led funding. [12th of November 2019]]] [...].[13][14] The company rebranded itself as Automation Anywhere, Inc., in 2010.[12]
Between 2018 and 2019, Automation Anywhere received a total of [our capital] in Series A and Series B investments [...]. In 2018, the company announced a total of Series A investments [...] from General Atlantic, Goldman Sachs, NEA, World Innovation Lab, SoftBank Investment Advisers, and Workday Ventures.[17][18 ["Automation Anywhere raises [our capital] from SoftBank's Vision Fund. [15th of November 2018]]] In late 2019, a Series B round, led by Salesforce Ventures, raised [our capital].[19]
In September 2019, Automation Anywhere was ranked No. 29 on [a magazine] Cloud 100, and was named a leader in [a consultancy agency]'s Magic Quadrant for RPA Software.[20 [[A consultancy agency] releases first-ever Magic Quadrant for RPA Software. [11th of July 2019]]][21]
[...] As part of its robotic process automation (RPA) the company built a smart digital assistant for enterprises [called Automation Anywhere Robotic Interface (AARI)] to automate their internal tasks.[23 [Automation Anywhere introduces smart assistant for enterprises to automate internal tasks. [7th of October 2020]]

Products
Automation Anywhere's products combine traditional RPA with cognitive elements such as natural language processing and reading unstructured data.[14] These include bots with machine-learning capabilities.[14][15]

[...]
[...]
Key people Riadh Dridi (CMO)[2 [Microsoft's acquisition of RPA firm Softomotive prompts sector leaders including UiPath and Automation Anywhere to brace for war. [23rd of May 2020]]]
[...]
Products

We quote an online encyclopedia about the company UiPath: "UiPath is a New York City-based global software company that develops a platform for robotic process automation (RPA). The company's software monitors user activity to automate repetitive front and back office tasks, including those performed using other business software such as customer relationship management or enterprise resource planning (ERP) software.
[...]

History
UiPath was founded in 2005 in Bucharest, Romania as DeskOver, by Romanian entrepreneurs Daniel Dines and Marius Tîrcă.[2]
In 2013, the company released the first UiPath Desktop Automation product line, which gave companies RPA tools to automate manual and repetitive back office tasks.[2]
In 2015, the company changed its name to UiPath.[2] [...] [3 [Romanian tech startup UiPath raises USD 30 mln to develop intelligent software robots [27th of April 2017]]]
[...]
In 2017 [...] In September, UiPath was ranked #3 on the [a magazine] Cloud 100.[6 [11th of September 2019]] [...] Also in October, the company announced UiPath Explorer, a new product using technology from the acquired companies; a robot communication tool called UiPath Apps; a low code robot programming tool called UiPath StudioX; an embedded analytics tool called UiPath Insights; and UiPath Connect, a tool that allowed every employee to find new processes to automate.[8][9]

Products
UiPath develops software to automate repetitive digital tasks normally performed by people. The technology combines emulating how humans read computer screens (AI Computer Vision) with APIs, and gives users access to prebuilt automation components that can be combined to automate routine processes.[10] Its earlier products simplified tasks performed using other business software such as CRM or ERP systems, in internal and back-office areas like accounting, human resources paperwork, and claims processing.[17][18] Newer applications for the company's software include coordinating with artificial intelligence systems to simplify repetitive front office tasks including customer management.[18]
UiPath's main product is the UiPath Automation Platform.[19] The platform combines a family of low-code visual integrated development environment (IDE) products called Studio for process creation, with client-side agents called Robots that execute those processes. The processes are deployed, monitored and managed remotely with a central management tool called Orchestrator.[20 [Review: UiPath aces robotic process automation. [6th of May 2019]] (see the fourth report quoted below)]
Additional available software includes:

UiPath's software products are available as native software or using the Software as a Service (SaaS) model.[8][20]
UiPath also hosts the UiPath Academy, to provide job training and certification in the field of Robotic Process Automation.[25]

Funding
[...]
On March 6, 2018, UiPath received [our capital] n investment from Accel, [Alphabet's] CapitalG, and Kleiner Perkins Caufield & Byers, [...].[26][27]
On April 30, 2019, UiPath raised [our capital] in a Series D round of funding led by hedge fund Coatue Management, with participation from Alphabet's CapitalG, Sequoia, Accel, Madrona Venture Group, IVP, Dragoneer, Wellington, Sands Capital, and funds advised by T. Rowe Price & Associates. [...] [18]"

Comment
See the other comments and the summary.

We quote a first report, which is about the company Blue Prism and was publicated on the 29th of August 2007: "Co-operative bank extends automation with Blue Prism
Co-operative Financial Services has extended its deployment of Blue Prism software to automate the daily process of accepting or rejecting direct debits, cheques and standing orders on accounts with insufficient funds.
"The business case for this project was to redeploy staff from manual roles into customer-facing account management roles, reduce the time taken by the process, and to manage all accounts with the same accuracy and consistency," said Joanne Masters, business systems manager at Co-operative Financial Services.
Masters said Blue Prism manages the whole process with very little human intervention required. Blue Prim's integration tool enables non-technical users to replicate the manual steps taken by clerical staff and interact with the bank's core systems non-invasively, she said.
[...]

Read more on Business applications
[...]
The evolution of RPA, from macros to process transformation"

Comment
The last sentence says it all in relation to what existed before our presentation of our Ontologic System (OS), including our Evolutionary operating system (Evoos), and what was created with our OS.

We quote a second report, which is about the fields of RPA and outsourcing, and the company Blue Prism, and was publicated in October 2012: "Robotic Automation Emerges as a Threat to Traditional Low-Cost Outsourcing
Why outsource when you can automate? For most organizations, the answer is IT bureaucracy. Budget bottlenecks and IT's ability to convolute any process improvement with massive waterfall technology implementations, even when the need is immediate, make automation a challenge. Yet automation looms as the right solution for the majority of [rule-based or] rules-driven processes that are being outsourced today.
[...] Research has spent some time examining a new technology called robotic automation, pioneered by UK-based vendor Blue Prism, that enables non-engineers to automate certain business processes quickly and cheaply. The technology appears best suited for processes that are highly [rule-based or] rules driven, and the requirement for which is too tactical or short-lived to justify development by IT organizations that favor service-oriented architecture (SOA) and tools like business process management (BPM) suites. Beyond breaking through the IT development bottleneck, the use of software robots to handle routine business processes has another attraction: it allows enterprises to reduce their reliance on offshore outsourcing. The economics are eye-popping: while an onshore FTE costing $80K can be replaced by an offshore FTE for $30K, a robot developed with the Blue Prism toolkit can perform the same function for $15K or less - without the drawbacks of managing and training offshore labor.
This paper examines Blue Prism's robotic automation technology (the first entrant we've identified in what we expect will eventually become a crowded vendor market), places it in the context of traditional IT-driven development process and complementary use of outsourcing, and draws on interviews with early adopters to illustrate its benefits. We examine the compelling business cases that have driven the adoption of robotic automation so far, some limitations on its use, and the challenges of implementing it in the face of internal skepticism and resistance. We conclude with some thoughts on its long-term ramifications, as we believe that robotic automation has the potential to be a highly disruptive and transformative technology for both buyers and the outsourcing industry as a whole."

Comment
Our Evolutionary operating system (Evoos) described in The Proposal was made public in December 1999.
Also note, no BPM, no SB, no SOA, no aaS, and so on in relation to RPA existed before our presentation of our Ontologic System (OS), including our Evoos, and what was created with out OS.
As we said, our royalties can be as high as we want to, because the savings are immense for the whole world.
It even seems to be that the savings by us are so high that no inflation is another effect.

We quote a third report, which is about the company Blue Prism and was publicated in 24th of January 2019: "Blue Prism looks to partners to expand robotic process automation with AI
Blue Prism helped coin the term robotic process automation (RPA) when the company was founded back in 2001 to help companies understand the notion of automating mundane business processes. Today, it's releasing updates to that platform, including an updated marketplace for exchanging connectors to extend the main product, and, in some cases, adding a layer of intelligence.
The product at its core has allowed non-technical users to automate a business process by simply dragging components into an interface. All of the process coding has been automated on the back end. You could have a process that scans a check, enters a figure in a spreadsheet and sends an automated message to another employee (or digital process) when it's done.
Dave Moss, company co-founder and CTO, sees a world in which companies are looking to digitization to stave off growing competition. Big insurance companies, financial services and other workflow-intensive organizations need to look beyond the automation capabilities his company has given them, and that is going to require an intelligence layer.
Today, the company wants to extend its core capability by offering more advanced tools in the Blue Prism Digital Exchange marketplace. The Exchange gives partners and customers the ability to create and share tools to enhance Blue Prism. To encourage those entities to add AI capabilities, the company also announced a new AI engine for building connectors to advanced AI tools from Amazon, Google, IBM and other AI platforms.
But the company doesn't want to simply leave it to partners to provide the innovation. It wants that happening in-house as well, and to that end it has created Blue Prism Labs, where it will work with these same technologies looking for ways to inject its RPA products with artificial intelligence. This could lead to more sophisticated automated workflows down the road, such as using image recognition technology to add metadata about a photo automatically.
While Blue Prism has been a public company since 2016, the market has attracted a slew of startups, which have in turn been attracting big bucks from investors on gaudy valuations. UIPath, a NYC RPA company, has raised [our capital]. Its most recent round in September [...].Automation Anywhere, a San Jose RPA startup, has raised [our capital], including an enormous [...] investment from SoftBank in November [...].
[Commentator:
...]
Good that the start-ups disrupted this space else Blue Prism would have kept selling Excel macros as "automation"."

Comment
We note that before our presentation of our Ontologic System (OS) the field was only about using macros, dedicated scripting languages, and programming languages with internal Application Programming Interfaces (APIs).
If at all, then Blue Prism has helped to coin the term robotic automation, though we have not seen any evidence supporting this claim.
Howsoever, it has copied the

• Artificial Intelligence (AI), specifically procedural representations of knowledge by (rule-based) logic programming,
• Machine Learning (ML),
• Computer Vision (CV),
• Cognitive Agent System (CAS), and
• Multi-Agent System (MAS),

of us.
In addition, the connectors are providing a way of direct connections between processes and in this way are a means to make our service broker or mediator of our Society for Ontological Performance and Reproduction (SOPR) obsolete.

We quote a fourth report, which is about the company UiPath and was publicated on the 6th of May 2019: "Review: UiPath aces robotic process automation.
[...]
Early attempts to streamline repetitive front-office tasks often involved macro-driven mouse tricks and screen-scraped regex voodoo. Those brittle solutions were tripped up by the slightest interface change. Uptime was spotty and maintenance never ending. Today, robotic process automation (RPA) builds on those early solutions but with a better-honed set of tools and technologies that ease both development and maintenance. RPA tools can adapt more readily to input changes, coax field-level data out of complex PDFs, and even turn terminal and thin client screens from mainframe or [Virtual Desktop Infrastructure (]VDI[)] applications into live, actionable forms.
Leading the way in RPA innovation is UiPath Enterprise RPA Platform. UiPath combines a low-code visual IDE for process creation (Studio), client-side agents that execute those processes (Robots), and a central hub and web console for deploying, monitoring, and managing those agents remotely (Orchestrator).
[...] UiPath's UI-based automation allows you to automate repetitive tasks out of human workflows without disrupting the underlying systems, putting you on the fast path to reducing process friction, improving data quality and compliance, and improving responsiveness in customer-facing channels.
And considering the minimal effort required to build a process app using UiPath - especially compared to traditional integration tools, where new back-end plumbing and API testing will greatly increase time and expense - UiPath presents an opportunity to modernize legacy workflows at a fraction of the cost.
[...]

UiPath RPA setup
UiPath is a Windows-only solution with several options for deployment. You can deploy UiPath on-premises or in the cloud, either as a local desktop service using the UiPath Studio IDE, or server-side using the full Orchestrator web app running on Windows Internet Information Server and Microsoft SQL Server (Standard or Enterprise edition).
[...] For cloud deployments, you'll also want to consider extending UiPath Orchestrator security to remote Robots with a VPN connection.
[...]

UiPath Studio
Getting started building workflows in UiPath Studio will be a cakewalk for anyone with BPM or Windows Workflow experience. Readymade, drag-and-drop activity components make it easy to build automations that mimic most any interaction a human would have with a desktop application or web browser. A good set of starter templates provides a base of simple one-off sequences, longer running transactional workflows, and UI-driven automations.
Although the component pallet isn't as helpfully graphical as, say, Blue Prism's, the built-in search made it easy to sift the components I needed. You'll find good components for flow logic and state management, parallel branching with wait conditions, and exception handling.
[...]
UiPath Robots can interact with data from myriad sources - databases and SOAP/XML/JSON calls, of course, but also Microsoft Office and Google G Suite, in addition to less-traditional sources like PDFs, websites, and mail servers. [...]
[...] And the Robot was running in minutes. Under the hood, the pluggable OCR engines - with options for Microsoft, ABBYY, and Google-worked flawlessly. Once extracted, data could be pushed to an Excel spreadsheet or popped onto a queue for additional processing.
[...]
UiPath gives you all the tools needed to direct Robots to open and close applications, enter keystrokes, and extract data from tables completely unattended. But UiPath Robots can also work alongside humans. The new Validation Station - part of the IntelligentOCR activity pack - allows you to weave humans into the mix for exception handling and validation when tasks demand it.

UiPath Orchestrator
The UiPath Orchestrator web application is the central controller for your Robot army. Orchestrator sets up your distributed workers to run autonomously, 24/7 - either on a set schedule or in some event-driven fashion - to monitor file system folders or to detect inbound emails for claims in need of processing, for example.
Although the Orchestrator web application isn't required for smaller deployments, it adds benefits like improved tracking and heartbeat monitoring of Robots, machines, and queues, as well as job scheduling, auditing, and user and license management.
Orchestrator supports Active Directory Windows Authentication out of the box as well as its own authentication service with basic role and user management provisions.
Through Orchestrator's web interface, I was able to structure my environments, add Robots and credentials, assign processes to bots, and then deploy those bots to the automation workforce. [...]
[...]

The UiPath to RPA
[...]
But I really like UiPath's familiar business process development workflow. It's more productive than the tabbed, configuration task templates in products like Automation Anywhere or the separate object and process windows of Blue Prism. Further setting UiPath apart from competitors is its ability to integrate automations on the front-end and the back-end, thanks to APIs and numerous connectors.
Several new additions - global exception handling, SAML 2.0 SSO support, and smart card authentication - help elevate the platform and go a long way toward addressing requirements in government and financial applications. [...]
UiPath also has a number of heavy-hitter partnerships that integrate prebuilt ERP and CRM activities from the likes of Salesforce, Oracle, and SAP, plus machine learning and AI activities for Python, IBM Watson, and DataRobot. UiPath's Go! Marketplace also offers a slew of ad hoc activities, workflows, and connectors including [IBM's] Node-RED's Amazon Echo and Slack webhooks [as part of visual flow-based programming in the field of Internet of Things (IoT)].
UiPath Enterprise RPA Platform is a rock-solid foundation for automating line-of-business processes that puts rapid automation wins within easy reach. And rapid automation wins represent only a fraction of RPA's potential.
The next stage in RPA will hinge on how quickly turnkey AI solutions - like natural language processing and predictive analytics - can be applied with the same drag-and-drop ease as OCR is today. We can look forward to UiPath - and competitors - harnessing AI in ways that finally allow businesses to break free of today's hard-coded BPM rules and begin piloting new technology projects that adapt automatically to changing business needs."

Comment
See the other comments and the summary.
Desktop as a Service (DaaS) seems not to be on the level of aSoftware as a Service (SaaS or SWaaS) model but on the level of a Infrastructure as a Service (IaaS) or Platform as a Service (PaaS) model.

We quote a fifth report, which is about the company UiPath and was publicated on the 22nd of June 2019: "UiPath: RPA and AI will be commoditized productivity tools within 5 years
"In three to five years, RPA and AI will become a commodity productivity tool, the same way as you use Excel and PowerPoint," proclaimed Boris Krumrey, chief robotics officer at UiPath, at the AI Summit in London last week.
[...]
RPA brings automation to laborious enterprise tasks through smart "software robots" that replicate repetitive (and tedious) tasks through rules-based processes. The technology is installed on top of popular business applications, which may include enterprise resource planning (ERP) software or customer relationship management (CRM) tools, and it monitors what humans do so that it can emulate them. If you ever have to carry out manual data entry tasks for hours or days at a time, RPA could be the answer to your prayers.

The state of play
Some estimates peg the RPA industry at $2.3 billion today, and it could grow to more than $4 billion by 2022 [(see also the sixth report quoted below)]. In the past year alone, some major cash injections have been put into RPA companies, including Automation Anywhere, which secured [our capital] from SoftBank; Kryon, which raised [our capital]; Softomotive, which nabbed [our capital and has been taken over by Microsoft]; and Automation Hero, which reeled in [our capital].
And then a couple of months back, UiPath raised a gargantuan [of our capital] round of funding [...].
UiPath was founded [...] in 2005, though it was originally known as Deskover. In the beginning, it was more of a software outsourcing company that built automation libraries and SDKs for major companies such as Google and Microsoft. [...]
With UiPath Studio, companies can access prebuilt activities and design automation processes visually through constructing diagrams, while the UiPath Orchestrator is where companies can deploy and manage all their robots and processes.
Although RPA is a fast-growing industry, these kind of productivity tools are still relatively low key - they're not "mainstream" in the same way as Microsoft Office or Google Docs. [...]

Mindset
For RPA and automation tools to become truly commoditized, they first have to be available for everyone to use - a "robot for every employee," as Krumrey puts it. And it's at this point where people will start to think "how can I automate this task" before they actually start doing it. It's about a change of mindset, where automation becomes a default consideration when doing just about anything.
Krumrey highlighted an interesting example of this, where one of its customers is meshing a UiPath robot with computer vision to watch physical mailboxes - whenever a package or letter lands in a box, the person aligned with that box receives an email.

RPA + AI
But one of the key sticking points for RPA to properly gain momentum is its current limitations - it works well with structured data, the kind that is found in business applications such as spreadsheets. But it's not yet in tune with the human psyche; it can't predict intent or preempt actions. It's not cognitive.
Applying AI to RPA will be a major next step for the industry, but there are obstacles - RPA and AI-focused data science teams usually operate in separate silos, in terms of the tools they use, the skills they have, and the processes they follow. A few months back, UiPath debuted a new early access program for a product it's calling AI Fabric, which is designed to "break down the barriers between RPA and data science teams" to let users apply the "cognitive power of AI" to any software currently automated by RPA.
Ease-of-use is key here. Users will be able to "drag and drop" AI skills, developed by UiPath and some 60 of its partners (including Google), into their automation workflow - this will help make existing UiPath robots more cognitive. The AI skill parameters can be customized, while suitably resourced companies will be able to integrate their own AI models.
"There's already a lot of machine learning models that are solving a problem that you can just drag, drop, and apply," Krumrey said. "One thing is to emulate humans, which is classical RPA. But the other part is that we have RPA and AI very closely integrated."
There are, of course, other factors at play in terms of the timeframe for "commoditizing" RPA and AI tools. Krumrey referred to the need for orchestration - "we need to be able to run multiple automation rules" - and defining an automation operating model.
[...]
But with automation creeping into all manner of industries through various conduits, the business case for investing in RPA and AI will only grow. And UiPath is gearing up to meet this demand. "We believe that RPA driving the bottom-up automation, combined with drag-and-drop AI skills, will be the next generation of office productivity tools," the company said."

Comment
As can be easily seen, the fields of

are also copied and integrated.

We quote a sixth report, which is about RPA and was publicated in July 2020: "Robotic Process Automation Market Worth $25.56 Billion By 2027
Robotic Process Automation Market Growth & Trends
[...] The organization's need to automate structured, repetitive processes to focus on core business activities and reduce operation time and effort is anticipated to drive the growth. The Robotic Process Automation (RPA) can be implemented across various business departments to automate numerous processes such as employee, customer, vendor onboarding, payroll processing, order processing, and report aggregation.
The integration of technology to automate repetitive tasks across industries has resulted in accelerated work, reduced human error, and increased throughput. The combination of RPA with cognitive technologies such as speech recognition, machine learning [(ML)], and Natural Language Processing (NLP) is capable of handling higher-order tasks with Artificial Intelligence (AI) assistance without humans' decision-making capabilities. RPA was designed to reduce repetitive tasks by following a set of predefined procedures that do not require knowledge or insights, while the integration of AI allows RPA softbots to function as a knowledge-based dynamic system to work beyond an automated cognitive system. The application of RPA from the bill of materials to customer query handling with the intelligence of AI has led to a high growth trajectory of the RPA market."

Comment
Doubtlessly and definitely, RPA is a part of our Ontologic System (OS), including our Evolutionary operating system (Evoos).
The report was titled "Robotic Process Automation (RPA) Market Worth $3.11 Billion by 2025" before. This updated report also gives the information that "[t]he global robotic process automation market size was estimated at USD 1.4 billion in 2019 and is expected to reach USD 2.53 billion in 2020." Another report says that "[RPA i]s estimated to reach [USD] 2.4bn by 2024 [... and], as a market, RPA is still relatively small, with a total revenue of slightly less than $850m in 2018" in July 2019. But the 3 leading businesses have a valuation of around 47 billion U.S. Dollar already and had only revenues of around 1 billion U.S. Dollar, which does not support their valuations. RPA in particular and unicorns in general look like the vehicles for a hidden Ponzi scheme or hidden pump and dump scheme, which also explains the ridiculous cloud bubble at the stock markets. Our SOPR has already reacted accordingly and made the Infrastructure as a Service (IaaS), Integration Infrastructure as a Service (IIaaS), Platform as a Service (PaaS), and Integration Platform as a Service (IPaaS), as well as SoftBionics as a Service (SBaaS) and Trust as a Service (TaaS or TraaS) capability models and operational models exclusive parts of the infrastructure of our SOPR.
See the other comments and the summary.

Summary
According to the data given in the quoted documents, we can recognize and identify several developments and related trends in this field of RPA.

Obviously, there was some automation until August 2007, but only around the years 2012 to 2015 the momentum for RPA built up the first time, which implies that

come from our OS, including our Evoos.

Besides the immensly high savings for the worldwide societies our RPA of the next generations also shows nicely, that our strategy to return the outsourced work by automation and create new jobs as part of the digitalization truly works. And at this point we do not even talk about all the improvements and the integrations of other fields made by our revolutionary OS.

By taking back SoftBionics as a Service (SBaaS) capability models and operational models by our SOPR on the level of Infrastructure as a Service (IaaS), Platform as a Service (PaaS), and similar as a Service capabilitiy and operational models (aaSx)

Some companies are already describing and providing their products as native software, specifically as computer desktop tools, software suits, and services using the SWaaS model.
SWaaS models include the so-called app store, but raw signals and data, informations, knowledge, models, and algorithms are traded on the Marketplace for Everything (MfE) of our SOPR, while the basic properties and component features of our OS together with the Ontologic Exchange (OntoEx or OEx) provide a trustworthy and reliable environment for the exchange of these digital and virtual goods.

But we will look at certain main contract tasks in relation to our SB and SBaaS in these specific cases of companies.

What is that for a mess "RPA + AI: The UiPath AI Fabric Vision"? It is not the vision, idea, invention, or whatsoever of UiPath and we made more than crystal clear that it is not allowed to even suggest that a part of our Ontologic System would have originated by another entity than UiPath. If this does not work to 100% immediately, which means now, then we will demand correct labelling whenever and wherever it hurts most.
Our terms and conditions are also crystal clear. Hopefully, those companies have not lied to their investors, though we are more than sure that for example Salesforce, Alphabet (Google), and SoftBank do know very well that we are the original.
The situation with companies situation as with SnapLogic, Skyvva, Informatica, Snowflake, and so on.
And why do we find all these start-ups in the clique of Microsoft, Salesforce, SAP, and so on?
The Salesforce trick to search for older companies and support them with huge venture capital investments to

does not work, because all those already existing companies changed their strategies and technologies following us (e.g. SnapLogic, Automation Anywhere), while all those start-ups simply copied us just right from the start. The same holds for start-ups and other entities supported by Microsoft and Co.. In most of those cases we only need to read the headline of a report, the title of a webpage or whitepaper, or 1 sentence of a publication to see what is truly going on at a company and read a 1 minute of such publications to have sufficient legal matter for our benefit.

10.March.2021

Clarification

The Metaverse describted in Neal Stephenson's novel "Snow Crash"

but definitely

• Ontoscope handheld variants, also wrongly called smartphone, and
• Ontoscope Head-Mounted Display (HMD) variants or New Reality (NR) HMD, also wrongly called Mixed Reality (MR) HMD and eXtended Reality (XR) HMD,

• field of Augmented Reality (AR) and hence not related to the field of Mixed Reality (MR) in
  • one orignal and unique definition and
  • our original and unique definition, which is called New Reality (NR) and also wrongly called eXtended Reality (XR),

  and

• concept of the digital twin in our original and unique creation, expression, and interpretation of our fusion of the real or physical identity and world, and the virtual or metaphysical or cybernetical identity and world through our
  • (cyberphysical) Caliber/Calibre and
  • Ontologic uniVerse or OntoVerse.

We do not know why entities

respectively why they are telling such a nonsense to the public.
Neither MREs, nor 3D video game environments, or other virtual environments are a metaverse or are like a metaverse, specifically if they are already in (the legal scope of) our OntoVerse (OV) of our Ontologic System (OS).

We also do not know why the companies have created the designation eXtended Reality and the associated acronym XR and are using them to mislead the public about the true origin of our original and unique works of art instead of our designation New Reality and our associated acronym NR, which are the only correct and legal ones for anything related to our Caliber/Calibre and OntoVerse.

But we do consider the use of the term metaverse in the context of our OS as another deliberate or willful infringement of the copyright law and the clause included in the Articles of Association (AoA) and the Terms of Services (ToS) of our Society for Ontological Performance and Reproduction (SOPR) that the public should not be mislead about the true origin of our OS.

By the way: We would also like to give the explanation to our fans and readers, who are not proficient with the copyright law, that not naming a creator of a work of art or not using the original designations of parts of a work of art, as used by its creator, also constitutes an infringement of the related copyright. Some examples in the context of our Ontologic System:

For sure, actions like these do not increase the individually granted discounts.

12.March.2021

22:35 UTC+1
Style of Speed Further steps

In the Further steps of the 15th of February 2021 we reported that "[w]e finally managed to increase the power of the model Continental GT of the brand Porsche/Volkswagen→Bentley to 1001 PS".
But we have assumed that the model Continental GT (3G) of the marque Bentley and the model Panamera (971) of the marque Porsche would also have the same transmission like the Audi RS7 (C8; internal 4K8), because they all share the same V8 engine and the other models of the marques Audi, Bentley, Porsche, Lamborghini, and Volkswagen with the same V8 engine are all Sports Utility Vehicles (SUVs).
In detail:

Now comes the problem. The PDK transmission mated to the V8 engine handles only up to 1,000 Nm of torque, of which 950 to 980 Nm are reliably available and for which even the software has to be reconfigured, while the automatic PT transmission handles up to 1,300 Nm of torque, of which 1,250 to 1,280 Nm are reliably available. We are not willing to waste around 300 Nm, because this translates to a slower acceleration and a lower maximal velocity.
Another company claims that the PDK transmission mated to the W12 engine handles 1,200 Nm of torque, of which at least 1,150 Nm are reliably available. We are not sure if we are willing to waste around 100 Nm, though this translates to an acceleration and a maximal velocity, which are even more impressive than the performances of an unmodified Bentley.

Howsoever, we tried to find a way to improve the Continental GT even further.
A first thought was to change the double clutch for a clutch with higher contact pressure or to change the clutch with a torque converter or an electric motor. But in both cases the next problem would be the gears. It took Bugatti many years to find out how to construct a transmission, which is able to handle the torque of a truck and simultaneously is sufficiently small and lightweight for a sportscar.
Another thought was to change the transmission, and if this is not possible, then to change the transmission and the engine of the Continental GT for the ones of the Bentayga. But in both cases the next problem would be to reprogramm the software, which could be quite complex due to the overall integration with the other electronic systems.

In the meantime, we have completely modified an Audi RS7, so to say as plan B, which has now a

A true hypercar with true daily driver qualities is not bad either, but not a Bentley. Maybe we should make a compromise until we can modify the Electric SportsCar™ (ESC) of Bentley or a new Rolls Royce, though in 5 years our Hover™ will take off. And then we are going where streets have no names and we do not need roads anymore.

13.March.2021

Clarification

Many expressions are presented and discussed with our original and unique works of art titled

besides our technological inventions and improvements required for the presentation and realization of said artistical expressions (comparable with the creation of a cultural movement, an art movement, an artistic style (e.g. in painting), and also the invention of a media to express the new movement (e.g. canvas in painting), invention of the new techniques, creation of the new styles (e.g. dots, patterns, etc.), improvements of the new tools (e.g. brush), and other related new items (e.g. paint and special colours), and also a new scientific discipline).
Some examplary expressions:

Therefore, all is copyrighted and others have to present own creations, but not modifications and variations respectively editions of our original Evoos and OS in whole or in part, so that any similarity with the original and any risk of confusion by the public about the true origin of the original among other legally relevant issues are avoided.

Truth and Trust is required to establish a chain of trust in relation to for example

• blockchain and IoT.

This is one of our original and unique expressions created and presented with our OS, which is also called approach and described in some more detail by plagiarists and us as follows: In a completely networked or connected world, often also called digitalized world, processes, including

are enabled by digital twins. Before raw signals and data, and informations get from the real or physical world into the virtual or metaphysical or cybernetical world as part of our cyberphysical fusion of these worlds to our New Reality (NR) and OntoVerse (OV) on a digital approach, packages of raw signals and data, and information are sealed directly at the place of their origin on the basis of validatable and verifiable, validating and verifying, and validated and verified technologies, such as

• Distributed Ledger Technology (DLT),

In this way, a chain of Non-Fungible Tokens (NFT) is formed as an unforgeable chain of trust, which guarantees that raw signals and data, and informations are not manipulated or deleted, and that nothing is added in any section of the chain of trust. The secured items can be verified by every qualified entity as if they would be at the place of origin and collection of these items.

In particular, others and we always say that "[s]elf-control has never proven itself in dealing with power and money".
Truth and Trust in the OS implies the ban of uncontrolled entities and therefore demands their ban.
The other way around, to allow the performance and reproduction of our OS by uncontrolled entities a modification of our OS is required, that breaks the expression of Truth and Trust, and is also unwanted by C.S. for other reasons.

15.March.2021

Ontonics Further steps

We learned that our hydrogen generating technologies provide 5% more efficiency in comparison to the state-of-the-art technologies. This is sufficient to take over the market.

Style of Speed Further steps

We spent the fourth evening with our spare time project, the Audi RS7 C8, also known as the alternative or plan B for our Bentley Continental GT.
We found an acceptable replacement part for the exterior.
We also optimized the

which increased the output from 1,001 PS to around 1,110 PS, for sure stable.
Yes, it is a true project Just 4 Fun™.

But honestly, the situation still really annoys us:

• remains the same and hence is too weak, or
• is not available at all.

So we go nuclear now, not literally due to the reason that our home fusion reactor comes in 5 years, but at least electric, if we are already reconstructing the car, with our brandnew, world's first model Bentley Continental GTE. Yes, our fans and readers guessed right: The E is for Electric, but not erratic.
Best of all, we

as usual. :)

Performance has a Name: Style of Speed or SoS - The Highspeed Competence.
In this common sense:
More Power - More Style - More Fun
More Power - More Speed - More Fun
More Style - More Speed - More Fun

17.March.2021

SOPR #318

*** Work in progress - better structure and wording ***
Topics
This issue discusses some aspects of the License Model (LM) and national security:

License Model (LM)
At this point we would like to recall some mandatories listed below:

More generally, we already said that the requirements and demands of the public and the applied procedures, including capricious and dirty tricks and crimes, will eventually lead to a much broader destruction of our OS and somehow of C.S. as well. That is not democracy anymore, but deepest middle ages or even older periods.
We also already said, that the requirements and demands of the public can only be achieved by a compromise, which means a related action on the other side and a related modification of our OS on our side. In this regard, we have carefully worked out and discussed several compromisses and modifications of our OS, specifically a balance between

But governments, industrial managements, and individual morons are not willing to make any compromises, because they are not willing to respect the rights and properties of C.S. and our corporation at all.
Eventually, we can only handle the situation with common sense, that is standard terms and conditions, including standard contracts and royalties, that are most advantagous for C.S. and our corporation, the enforcement of our rights at the courts, and so on. Our SOPR was, is, and will be no experiment.

In general, the activities of governments, leading industrial companies, and other more or less important entities, specifically that our initial assumption about constructive collaboration has not been realized, and the facts that companies are more and more becoming our corporation and our royalties are by far below the common standard in arts and also below the common standard in industries left us no other choice than to

By the way: We still do not understand, why the ministers of all governments and the attorneys of all industrial companies have not formed a queue at our office in the last 3 years to sign the contracts with our ridiculously low and liberal terms and conditions as soon as possible.
But we always said that what they want is by far more expensive. Eventually, they are still prefering to destroy and steal.

20% is common licensing pracitce in relation to the publication of a book, same or lower shares of revenue are common in relation to the publicaiton of a musical work, etc.

But we can also argue our royalties as single parts as follows:

• permanent solo runs of politics, press, and industries,
• permanent winding up,
• permanent blackmailing,
• costs of quality journalism, aka. lying press tax, always included,
• cost savings for the entire civilization,
• manipulation at the stock markets,
• refusal to prohibit illegal digital and virtual currencies,
• refusal to stop espionage,
• etc.

• increased damages,
• decreased momentum,
• etc. in the last 3 years of the negotiation phase.

In particular, some details have to be decided concerning the

• Infrastructure as a Service (IaaS),
• Integration Infrastructure as a Service (IIaaS),
• Platform as a Service (PaaS), and
• Integration Platform as a Service (IPaaS),

  including the

  • Operating system aaS (OpsaaS),
  • Network aaS (NaaS),
  • Connectivity Management aaS (CMaaS), and
  • similar aaS,

capability models and operational models, as well as other aaS models (aaSx) on these levels or comparable with these levels are only done by main contractors, suppliers, and service providers (1st undertaking option (see the section Legal matter [3 undertaking options] of the issue SOPR #314 of the 7th of January 2021).

As we already noted, in relation to liquid (respectively modular, compatible, and so on) models, functions, frameworks, components, applications, services, Service-Oriented technologies (SOx, as a Service models (aaSx), and so on, including operational models such as for example Operating system as a Service (OpsaaS) a regulation in this regard makes no sense, because our Ontoverse is a fusion of real and virtual spaces or environments full of all kinds of persons, animals, and things, as well as functions, applications, and services.
Processes of main contractors, suppliers, and service providers of our SOPR are always acting in the scope of the 1st undertaking option by plain logic, but not processes for their own undertakings, for which they can choose one of the 3 undertaking options.

License Model (LM) [License classes]
Our SOPR is considering to

• BasicOAOS (applications and services) - 1 up to 2 OAOS or 1 up to 5 OAOS,
• MidOAOS (large applications and services, or small platforms) - 3 up to 5 OAOS or 6 up to 15 OAOS, and
• SuperOAOS (large platforms) - 2 up to 3 MidOAOS or 6 up to 15 OAOS or 16 up to 25 OAOS,

• BasicGood - ordinary hardware and other tangible goods utilized in our OS,
• MidGood - ordinary hardware and other tangible goods based on our OS, and
• SuperGood - hardware and other tangible goods, that perform and reproduce the artistical expression even more,

or

Our SOPR is also considering to ask for a relative fee respectively share of the revenue generated with the performance and reproduction of the related parts of our OS in accordance with the differentiation of OAOS and hardware proposed above:

• BasicOAOS - 10%,
• MidOAOS - 15%,
• SuperOAOS - 20%,

plus progression of up to 10% as discussed, and

• BasicGood - 7%,
• MidGood - 8%,
• SuperGood - 9%,

plus progression of up to 1% as discussed for the ICT licensee class, the other licensee classes accordingly, and with all discounts granted.

In particular, some details have to be decided concerning the

Maybe we make the classification of licensees more fine-grained by taking both aspects, the limitation and the connectivity, in relation to OAOS into account when classifying a licensee of our SOPR.
Another idea is to add a fourth class of OAOS.

But if undermined once again, then there is not much of room anymore. For example, IaaS and PaaS models are declared as SaaS models, which reflects our initial problem with as a Service (aaS) capability models and operational models (aaSx) in relation to our OS with its Ontologic System Architecture (OSA), which simply makes not such a differentiation due to its characteristic, which we called liquid (respectively modular, compatible, and so on) models, functions, frameworks, components, applications, services, SO technologies (SOx), aaS models (aaSx), and so on (aaS level structure and models used for better discussion and understanding) regarding the

We still have the opinion that the common standards and licensing practices in arts and industries are appropriated due to the

so at least between 15 to 25% (BasicOAOS or 1 up to 2 OAOS).

However the thing is turned and squeezed under common sense and standards we always get the same result that is at least 15%, 20%, 25% plus progression of up to 10% for the ICT licensee class, the other licensee classes accordingly, and with all discounts granted.

We are still not sure between the following variants:

maximal individual discount of -22%

maximal individual discount of -20%

maximal individual discount of -15%

for the ICT class, the other licensee classes accordingly, and with all discounts granted.

In this relation, we also have to note that it is our ingenuity, achievement, and luck that the whole world has taken our OS, including our Evoos, and therefore the quantity has no influence on the quality and eventually on this matter respectively the royalty for a performance and reproduction.

We are also weighing in our exclusive infrastructure and other mandatories, which might reduce the 25% as part of said compromise with the public.
Some exclusives are listed below:

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

• Universal Ledger (UL or UniL),
• SOPR Trustee, and
• SOPR Public Trustee,

• Ontologic Bank (OntoBank)

• raw signals and data, informations, knowledge, models, and algorithms

• Traffic Management System (TMS or TrMS) of the Next Generation and Intelligent TMS of our Society for Superstructure Utilization and Management (SSUM)
  • Air Traffic Management (ATM) System (ATMS),
  • Airspace System of the Next Generation, and
  • Unmanned Aircraft System (UAS) Traffic Management (UTM) System (UTMS),
• Medicine 4.0,
• Healthcare 4.0,

We are also finishing a revised License Model (LM) for hardware goods, that we are already applying since quite some time, that is on the

For example, the

In relation to the revision of the License Model (LM) of our SOPR we are also thinking about a differentiaton between access things and common things:

differentiation between access places, devices, and other things, and common places, devices, and other things

progression up to 1% as discussed in the case of OAOS

Some examples in the context of our Ontologic System:

For sure, actions like these do not increase the individually granted discounts.

Please note that the 51% ownership regulation might be applied.

Please note that we are still 5% below the common standards in arts and industries and could increase our royalties by such a percentage without getting problems with competition rules or antitrust laws.
But we can also see that something is beginning to work as it always had to be and we have to acknowledge improvements as well. If this does not work, then many entities have to talk with other entities and prepare for existential measures.

We concluded that our original and unique work of art titled Ontoscope and created by C.S., which is an essential part of our Ontologic System and also wrongly called smartphone, Mixed Reality (MR) headset, smart car, connected car, and autonomous car, and so on, has to be viewed like other works of art (e.g. books), when it comes to licensing its performance and reproduction.

Also, as we said before, the modification of our OS demanded by the public has broken and destroyed to a significant extent the original and unique expression of our works of art titled Ontologic System and created by C.S., so that it is not interesting for us that much anymore from the artistical point of view and we are doing the SOPR more or less for

• hold and exploit all of our rights and power of control, and
• have the opinion that supervision is required due to the reason that we fear a bigger chaos otherwise and have not seen another entity with all required qualities,

and

National Security [Bionics]

19.March.2021

Clarification

In fact, one prominent property and functionality of our Ontologic File System (OntoFS) software component of our Ontologic System (OS) is the Non-Fungible Token (NFT) technique given by the crystal clear and unforgeable facts that our OntoFS

and therefore also

Variant 1
0. create a new file as seed,
1. attach a data to the file,
2. encrypt cryptographically the file,
3. begin again at 1.

Variant 2
0. create a new file as seed,
1. put a content into the file respectively attach a data to the file,
2. put the file into a folder,
3. encrypt cryptographically the folder,
4. take the encrypted folder as the new file,
5. begin again at 1.

Variant 3
0. encrypt cryptographically a file as seed,
1. create a new folder,
2. put the encrypted file into the folder,
3. create a new file,
4. put a content into the file,
5. put the file into the folder,
6. encrypt cryptographically the folder with both files,
7. take the encrypted folder as the new encrypted file,
8. begin again at 1.),

and

We have deliberately selected exactly these features and utilizations of our OntoFS to prove that we have integrated the

• decentralized blockchain framework and distributed computing environment Ethereum, and
• variant of Askemos extended with the blockchain technique,

If a fan or a reader is still in doubt, then we highly recommend to read our explanation above once again and eventually accept the facts, our rights and properties, and our New Reality (NR).

22.March.2021

Style of Speed Further steps

Since some time, we are studying the history of ocean liners in relation to the overall design of the yacht CS 1. Unsurprisingly, we came in contact with the history of the SS United States (SS US) in the course of this, which is the last ocean liner that won the Blue Riband and also the object of various attempts to preserve its heritage with more or less success. In fact, the SS US is rotting in the harbour of Philadelphia, U.S.America, avoiding the scrap yard since years, and being the subject of several unrealized concepts and plans drawn up to conserve and restore the ship.

For example, one of these plans of a cruise line comprises the redesign of the ship and the intention to put it back in service. But this plan has only commercial goals, which already failed due to the lack of viability, which is always the case in relation to such objects (e.g. works of art, historial buildings, vintage vehicles, and so on), because their ownership, management, operation, and maintenance are just too expensive as an ordinary enterprise.
In addition, the presented design is not convincing, because it does not retain the original design of the exterior to increase the profit margin and also lacks solutions of other cruise lines in this regard.

Culture in our house has always to do with high-technology, and because we already have everything in stock for such an endeavour, due to the work on the CS 1, we simply created our concept for the SS US as well, so to say as some kind of another fun and heritage project besides street legal surface vehicles, which comprises the following general points:

• moving museum (object) respectively naval museum (no museum inside the ocean liner but showing the 600 or more donated artefacts), and
• technology carrier,

• event object or event location, and
• luxury cruise liner,

• USS US, if used as museum and event location, and
• CS 1, if SS US is on journey or technology presentation tour,

23.March.2021

Comment of the Day

Metaverse 2™

Metaverse 2.0™
MV 2™
MV 2.0™

20:42 UTC+1
Clarification

Since some weeks, we are reading more and more reports related to the original and unique work of art titled Ontologic System and created by C.S. with its

But the truth is that there is no metaverse with digital and virtual ledger technologies and Apple AR interface at all.

We quote an online encyclopedia about the subject metaverse: "The Metaverse is a collective virtual shared space, created by the convergence of virtually enhanced physical reality and physically persistent virtual space,[1 [Metaverse Roadmap Overview, 2007]] including the sum of all virtual worlds, augmented reality, and the Internet. [This was stolen from the webpages Overview and Caliber/Calibre of the website of our Ontologic System OntoLinux and publicated as the so-called Metaverse Roadmap in the year 2007 by fraudulent entities. See the Clarification of the 10th, 13th, and 19th of March 2021 and our related detailed investigations, and also note the term overview instead of summary, introduction, and so on.]
[...]
The term was coined in Neal Stephenson's 1992 science fiction novel Snow Crash, where humans, as avatars, interact with each other and software agents, in a three-dimensional space that uses the metaphor of the real world.[3] [...]
The concept was made famous under another term, cyberspace, which first appeared in the short story 'Burning Chrome' by William Gibson (Omni, July 1982) and was a central theme in his 1984 groundbreaking novel, Neuromancer.[5]
[...]

Stephenson's Metaverse in Snow Crash
Stephenson's Metaverse appears to its users as an urban environment, developed along a single hundred-meter-wide road, the Street, that runs the entire 65536 km (216 km) circumference of a featureless, black, perfectly spherical planet. The virtual real estate is owned by the Global Multimedia Protocol Group, a fictional part of the real Association for Computing Machinery, and is available to be bought and buildings developed thereupon.
Users of the Metaverse gain access to it through personal terminals that project a high-quality virtual reality display onto goggles worn by the user, or from low-quality public terminals in booths (with the penalty of presenting a grainy black and white appearance). Stephenson also describes a sub-culture of people choosing to remain continuously connected to the Metaverse by wearing portable terminals, goggles and other equipment [...]. The users of the Metaverse experience it from a first person perspective."

Comment
First of all, we note that the term cyberspace first appeared in the visual arts and architecture in the years 1968 to 1970, when Danish artist Susanne Ussing and Carsten Hoff constituted themselves as Atelier Cyberspace.

Obviously, what is called metaverse is only a Virtual Reality Environment (VRE), which in addition has not our extensions with the

• cryptography and cryptographic system,
• Byzantine Fault Tolerance (BFT) protocols,
• Byzantine-Resilient Replication (BRR) method,
• verifiable or verified computing,
• capability-based security, specifically capability-based operating system,
• attribute-based cryptosystem respectively Attribute-Based Encryption (ABE),
• homomorphic cryptosystem respectively Partially Homomorphic Encryption (PHE) and Fully Homomorphic Encryption (FHE),
• Probabilistically Checkable Proof (PCP) system,
• searchable cryptosystem respectively Searchable Encryption (SE) and Verifiable Searchable Encryption (VSE),
• etc.,
• smart contract technique and smart contract-based technologies (e.g. environments, systems, platforms, and frameworks), goods, and services,
• blockchain technique and blockchain-based technologies (e.g. environments, systems, platforms, and frameworks), goods, and services,
• Non-Fungible Token (NFT) technique and NFT-based technologies (e.g. environments, systems, platforms, and frameworks), goods, and services,
• Distributed Ledger Technology (DLT) (used illegally for Bitcoin, Ethereum, etc., and Smart Contract as a Service (SCaaS) and Blockchain as a Service (BaaS or BlaaS) capability models and operational models), and
• other digital and virtual ledger technologies,
• cryptocurrency,
• operating system,
• etc.,

• Industrial Internet of Things (IIoT),
• Industry 4.0 and 5.0,
• blockchain and IoT,
• etc.,

In fact, there is only our original and unique, copyrighted work of art titled Ontologic System with its Caliber/Calibre (including cyber-physical, phygital, or digital twins), Ontologic uniVerse or OntoVerse, and OntoScope (OSc) and OntoLedger (OL) Ontologic System Components (OSC), 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. (see once again the Clarification of the 10th, 13th, and 19th of March 2021).

See also the Clarification of the 16th of April 2016 and the issue SOPR #238 of the 18th of October 2019 for longer discussions of this and related topics.

Do not be fooled by the lying press, plagiarists, stealing companies, and other serious criminals.

24.March.2021

Clarification or
Investigations::Multimedia

New York Times
The New York Times is misleading the public again and again.

We quote a first report about the Non-Fungible Token (NFT) technique and our Ontologic Net (ON), Ontologic Web (OW), and Ontologic uniVerse (OV), or simply Ontoverse: "[...] NFTs are the future of the attention economy. Or a scam. Or both.
[...]
The most bullish argue [NFT-based] transactions [...] could be the beginnings of a brand-new version of the internet [called Ontologic Net (ON), Ontologic Web (OW), and Ontologic uniVerse (OV)], while detractors see it as a reckless, overhyped speculation market and an "ecological nightmare pyramid scheme.
[...]
But [persons are] also fascinated with how NFTs make us rethink how we conceive of assets in the digital world. If a short, authenticated video clip [...] can become a valuable collectible, it seems poised to force us to reconsider deeply held notions of value. This seems like another maturation of the attention economy, where anything can be sliced up, repackaged and sold.
[...]
"If you were going to say, 'Let's let creators own their work and profit from it in perpetuity,' the system you'd design would be the opposite of this," he told [the author of the report] recently. "Instead, they designed an environmental catastrophe in which the only way you can participate is to have already bought into hyperinflated prices on a completely contrived market." He compared the NFT market and its exorbitant prices to expensive condos in cities like Manhattan bought by billionaires that sit empty. "It's just a store of value," he said."

Comment
First of all, our original and unique work of art titled Ontologic System and created by C.S. with its

• OntoBot (OB),
• OntoScope (Osc),
• Ontologic File System (OntoFS [or OFS]),
• OntoLedger (OL),
• OntoMotion (OM),
• Ontologic operating system Core (OntoCore (OC)), and
• other Ontologic System Components (OSC),

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

• Ontoscope (Os) and
• other means of access based on Ontoscope Components (OsC)

are definitely not the future and not a scam and even not both, but the already existing legal performance and reproduction of the original and unique expression of idea created and presented with our ArtWork (AW).
But why is our OS not named and referenced instead of giving a hyperlink to an opinion of an also misleading website about the value chain of the open metaverse unclosed, interoperable, and licensed Ontoverse?
Even more questionable and enlightening is the fact, that this was written and publicated deliberately as a reaction on our related Clarification of the 23rd of March 2021 (yesterday) and our clarifications cited therein and a continuation to mislead the public about our works of art and other achievements.

At least, we got once again more evidences and proves, that our OS with its OSC, ON, OW, and OV, OsC, and so on is the original and what we described as Web 3.0, Web 4.0, Web 5.0, and so on, and therefore we got more legal ammunition to enforce our rights and power of control over our properties.

By the way:

• royalties, if they are performing and reproducing our OS, and also
• damage compensations, if they are using illegal digital and virtual currencies for selling NFTs.

We quote a second report about the NFT technique and our ON, OW, and OV, or simply Ontoverse: "Today is an essay that I'm both excited and nervous about.
Excited because some of the most fascinating work in tech is being done rebuilding the underlying structure of the internet and the economy, and I've wanted an excuse to dive in. We're going deep on Web3 Web 3.0, NFTs, and the Metaverse Ontoverse. It's all more mind-blowing and more legit than I expected coming into this piece.
Nervous because, like APIs All the Way Down, I am airdropping into a couple of different worlds in which thousands of people smarter than me have spent years building, investing, and exploring. I'm trying to explain topics that are so much deeper than I could cover in even a year."

Comment
We would add C.S. and our corporation have spent years of creating, because this fascinating work is our original and unique work of art

• overall integrating Ontologic System Architecture (OSA)
• Caliber/Calibre,
• Ontologic Net (ON), Ontologic Web (OW), and Ontologic uniVerse (OV) uniVerse,
• Web 3.0, Web 4.0, and Web 5.0,
• New Reality (NR),
• Ontoscope,
• and so on,

• the work of art titled Analysis and Design of an Operating System According to Evolutionary and Genetic Aspects, also called Evolutionary operating system (Evoos), including the foundations of the
  • operating system-level virtualization or containerization and what is wrongly called cloud, edge, and fog computing,
  • microService-Oriented Architecture (mSOA),
  • and so on,
• Internet,
• World Wide Web (WWW),
• Mediated Reality (MedR),
• mobile phone or cell phone with web browser, interpreter and Virtual Machine (VM) for executing scripting and programming languages, and access to the Web 2.0,
• and so on,

We can remember how exciting it was when it suddenly made click in the brain of C.S. with validated and verified, trusted identity, APIs, services, Mixed Reality (MR), digital twins, and so on around the year 2002. It was like Einstein had when travelling by train and suddenly concludded it is geometric and E=m*c².
And later the spying entities got clammy hands, when they saw the final result in the end of October and the beginning of November 2006.

25.March.2021

Clarification
Investigations::Multimedia

This clarification or investigation is the next one about topics related to our original and unique work of art titled Ontologic System and created by C.S. with the

and discussed for example in the Clarification or Investigation of the 10th of March 2021, 19th of March 2021, 23rd of March 2021, and 24th of March 2021.
In the following we quote and comment some reports, which were written by fascinated authors, who seems to have finally got a first hunch or idea, or even a first understanding about our astonishingly and amazingly ingenious and refined masterpiece, to clarify what these parts of our Ontologic System (OS) are and what they are not, and also unmask the usual plagiarists, fraudsters, and serious criminals.

We quote a first report, which is about our Ontologic System (OS) and was publicated on the 13th of January 2020: "Since the late 1970s and early 1980s, many of those in the technology community have imagined a future state of, if not quasi-successor to, the Internet - called the "Metaverse". And it our Ontologic System with its Ontoverse would does revolutionize not just the infrastructure layer of the digital world, but also much of the physical one, as well as all the services and platforms atop them, how they work, and what they sell. Although [T]he full vision for the Metaverse Ontoverse remains hard to define is defined, seemingly fantastical, and decades away, the pieces have started to feel and become very real. And as always with this sort of change, its arc is as long and unpredictable as its end state is lucrative.
[...]

Chapter 1: What Is The "metaverse Ontoverse"?
The most common conceptions of the Metaverse Ontoverse stem from science fiction. Here, the Metaverse is typically portrayed as a sort of digital "jacked-in" internet - a manifestation of actual reality, but one based in a virtual (often theme park-like) world, such those portrayed in Ready Player One and The Matrix. And while these sorts of experience are likely to be an aspect of the Metaverse Ontoverse, this conception is limited in the same way movies like Tron portrayed the Internet as a literal digital "information superhighway" of bits.
Just as it was hard to envision in 1982 what the Internet of 2020 would be - and harder still to communicate it to those who had never even "logged" onto it at that time - we don't really know how to describe the Metaverse Ontoverse. However, we can identify core attributes.
The Metaverse Ontoverse, we think, will ...
1. Be persistent - which is to say, it never "resets" or "pauses" or "ends", it just continues indefinitely
2. Be synchronous and live - even though pre-scheduled and self-contained events will happen, just as they do in "real life", the Metaverse Ontoverse will be a living experience that exists consistently for everyone and in real time
3. Have no real cap to concurrent participations with an individual sense of "presence" - everyone can be a part of the Metaverse Ontoverse and participate in a specific event/place/activity together, at the same time and with individual agency
4. Be a fully functioning economy - individuals and businesses will be able to create, own, invest, sell, and be rewarded for an incredibly wide range of "work" that produces "value" that is recognized by others
5. Be an experience that spans both the digital and physical worlds, private and public networks/experiences, and open and closed platforms
6. Offer unprecedented interoperability of data, digital items/assets, content, and so on across each of these experiences [...]. Today, the digital world basically acts as though it were a mall where though every store used its own currency, required proprietary ID cards, had proprietary units of measurement for things like shoes or calories, and different dress codes, etc.
7. Be populated by "content" and "experiences" created and operated by an incredibly wide range of contributors, some of whom are independent individuals, while others might be informally organized groups or commercially-focused enterprises
There are a few other ideas that may be core to the Metaverse Ontoverse, but are not widely agreed upon. One of these concerns is whether participants will have a single consistent digital identity (or "avatar") that they will use across all experiences. This would have practical value but is probably unlikely as each of the leaders in the "Metaverse Ontoverse era" will still want their own identity systems. Today, for example, there are a few dominant account systems - but none have exhaustive coverage of the web and they often stack atop one another with only limited data sharing/access (e.g. your iPhone is based around an iOS account, then you might log into an app using your Facebook ID, which itself is your Gmail account).
There is also disagreement on how much interoperability is required for the Metaverse Ontoverse to really be "the Metaverse Ontoverse", rather than just an evolution of today's Internet. Many also debate whether a true Metaverse Ontoverse can have a single operator (as is the case in Ready Player One). Some believe the definition (and success) of a Metaverse the Ontoverse requires it to be a heavily decentralized platform built mostly upon community-based standards and protocols (like the open web) and an "open source" Metaverse OS or platform (this doesn't mean there won't be dominant closed platforms in the Metaverse Ontoverse).
Another idea relates to the fundamental communications architecture of the Metaverse Ontoverse. This is described in more detail later in the piece, but while today's Internet is structured around individual servers "talking" to one another on an as-needed basis, some believe the Metaverse Ontoverse needs to be "wired" and "operated" around persistent many-to-many connections. But even here, there's no consensus around exactly how this would work, nor the degree of decentralization required.
It's also helpful to consider what the Metaverse Ontoverse is often, but incorrectly, likened to. While each of these analogies is likely to be a part of the Metaverse Ontoverse, they aren't actually the Metaverse Ontoverse. For example, The Metaverse Ontoverse is not ...
1. A "virtual world" - Virtual worlds and games with AI driven characters have existed for decades, as have those populated with "real" humans in real time. This isn't a "meta" (Greek for "beyond") universe, just a synthetic and fictional one designed for a single purpose (a game).
2. A "virtual space" - Digital content experiences like Second Life are often seen as "proto-MetaversesOntoverse" because they (A) lack game-like goals or skill systems; (B) are virtual hangouts that persist; (C) offer nearly synchronous content updates; and (D) have real humans represented by digital avatars. However, these are not sufficient attributes for the Metaverse Ontoverse.
3. "Virtual reality" - VR is a way to experience a virtual world or space. Sense of presence in a digital world doesn't make a Metaverse Ontoverse. It is like saying you have a thriving city because you can see and walk around it.
A "digital and virtual economy" - These, too, already exist. Individual games [...] have long had functioning economies where real people trade virtual goods for real money, or perform virtual tasks in exchange for real money. In addition, platforms [...], as well as technologies [...], are based around the hiring of individuals/businesses/computational power to perform virtual and digital tasks. We are already transacting at scale for purely digital items for purely digital activities via purely digital marketplaces.
4. A "game" - Fortnite has many some elements of the Metaverse Ontoverse. It (A) mashes up IP; (B) has a consistent identity that spans multiple closed platforms; (C) is a gateway to a myriad of experiences, some of which are purely social; (D) compensates creators for creating content, etc. However, as is the case with the partial Ontoverse clone OASIS of Ready Player One, it remains too narrow in what it does, how far it extends, and what "work" can occur (at least for now). While the Metaverse Ontoverse may have some game-like goals, include games, and involve gamification, it is not itself a game, nor is it oriented around specific objectives.
5. A "virtual theme park or Disneyland" - Not only will the "attractions" be infinite, they will be not be centrally "designed" or programmed like Disneyland, nor will they all be about fun or entertainment. In addition, the distribution of engagement will have a very long tail[.]
6. A "new app store" - No one needs another way to open apps, nor would doing so "in VR" (as an example) unlock/enable the sorts of value supposed by a successor Internet. The Metaverse Ontoverse is substantively different from today's Internet/mobile models, architecture, and priorities.
7. A "new [User-Generated Content (]UGC[)] platform" - The Metaverse Ontoverse is not just another YouTube or Facebook-like platform in which countless individuals can "create", "share", and "monetize" content, and where the most popular content represents only the tiniest share of overall consumption. The Metaverse Ontoverse will be a place in which proper empires are invested in and built, and where these richly capitalized businesses can fully own a customer, control APIs/data, unit economics, etc. In addition, it's likely that, as with the web, a dozen or so platforms hold significant shares of user time, experiences, content, etc.
(If you want a simpler way to think about the Metaverse Ontoverse, you can imagine it as the Nightmare Before Christmas - you can walk into any experience or activity, and potentially address almost any of your needs, from a single starting point or world that's also populated by everyone else you know. But what's important is to recognize the Metaverse Ontoverse isn't a game, a piece of hardware, or an online experience. This is like saying is 'World of Warcraft', the iPhone, or Google is the Internet. They are digital worlds, devices, services, websites, etc. The Internet is a wide set of protocols, technology, tubes and languages, plus access devices and content and communication experiences atop them. Metaverse Ontoverse will be too.)

Chapter 2: Why Does The Metaverse Ontoverse Matter?
Even if the Metaverse Ontoverse falls short of the fantastical visions captured by science fiction authors, it is likely to produce trillions in value as a new computing platform or content medium. But in its full vision, the Metaverse Ontoverse becomes the gateway to most all digital experiences, a key component of all physical ones, and the next great labor platform.
The value of being a key participant, if not a driver, of such a system is self-evident - there is no "owner" of the Internet today, but nearly all of the leading Internet companies rank among the 10 most valuable public companies on earth. And if the Metaverse does indeed serve as a functional "successor" to the web - only this time with even greater reach, time spent, and more commercial activity - there's likely to be even more economic upside. Regardless, the Metaverse Ontoverse should produce the same diversity of opportunity as we saw with the web - new companies, products and services will emerge to manage everything from payment processing to identity verification, hiring, ad delivery, content creation, security, and so forth. This, in turn, will mean many present-day incumbents are likely to fall.
More broadly, the Metaverse Ontoverse stands to alter how we allocate and monetize modern resources. For centuries, developed economies have transformed as the scarcity of labor and real-estate waxed and waned. Under the Metaverse Ontoverse, would-be laborers who choose to live outside cities will be able to participate in the "high value" economy via virtual labor. As more consumer spending shifts to virtual goods, services, and experiences, we'll also see further shifts in where we live, the infrastructure that's built, and who performs which tasks. Consider, for example, "Gold Farming". Not long after in-game trade economies emerged, many "players" - often employed by a larger company and typically in lower-income countries - would spend a workday collecting digital resources for sale inside or outside the game. These sales were typically to higher-income players in the West. And while this "labor" is typically menial, repetitive, and limited to a few applications, the diversity and value of this "work" will grow as the Metaverse Ontoverse itself does.

Chapter 3: How Does One Simply Build A Metaverse The Ontoverse?
The Metaverse Ontoverse will require countless new technologies, protocols, companies, innovations, and discoveries to work. And it won't directly come into existence; there will be no is a clean "Before Metaverse Ontoverse" and "After Metaverse". Instead, it will slowly emerge over time as different products, services, and capabilities integrate and meld together. However, it's helpful to think of three core elements that need to come into place.
(One way I try to think about these three areas is via the Book of Genesis - first, "God" must create the underlying universe ("concurrency infrastructure"), then s/he must define its laws of physics and rules ("standards and protocols"), then s/he must fill it with life ("content") that's worthwhile, evolves, and iterates against selection pressures. God, in other words, doesn't create and design the world as though it were a miniature model, but enables one to grow across a mostly blank tableau etc.)
Concurrency Infrastructure
At a foundational level, the technology simply does not yet exist for there to be hundreds, let alone millions of people participating in a shared, synchronous experience. [...]
Not only does the Metaverse Ontoverse require infrastructure that currently does not exist a little, the Internet was never designed for anything near this experience. After all, it was designed to share files from one computer to another. As a result, most of the Internet's underlying systems are oriented around one server talking to one other server or an end-user device. [...] The Internet simply wasn't designed for persistent (versus continuous) communication, let alone persistent communication that is synchronized in precise real time to countless others.
To operate, the Metaverse Ontoverse requires something more akin to video conferencing and video games. These experiences work because of persistent connections that update each other in real-time and with a degree of accuracy that other programs don't generally need. However, they tend not to have high levels of concurrency: most video chat programs max out beyond a few people, and once you hit 50, you tend to need to "live stream" a broadcast to your viewers, rather than share a two-way connection. To this end, these experiences neither need to be, nor are they, exactly live.
[...] Although some games with highest concurrencies have existed for more than twenty years, such as Second Life or Warcraft, they essentially spoofed the experience by "sharding" and splitting users into different "worlds" and servers. Eve Online, for example, can technically have more than 100,000 players "in the same game", but they are split across different galaxies (i.e. server nodes). As a result, a player only really sees or interacts with a small handful of other players at any one time.
A number of companies are working hard to solve this details of the problem [...]. But this is an enormous computational challenge and one that fights against the underlying design/intent of the Internet.
Standards, Protocols, and their Adoption
The Internet as we experience it today works because of standards and protocols for visual presentation, file loading, communications, graphics, data, and so forth. These include everything from consumer-recognizable .GIFs filetypes to the websocket protocol that underlies almost every form of real-time communication between a browser and other servers on the internet.
The Metaverse Ontoverse will require an even broader, more complex, and resilient set of S&Ps. What's more, the importance of interoperability and live synchronous experiences means we'll need to prune some existing standards and "standardize" around a smaller set per function. [...] In addition, these companies are incredibly resistant to cross-integrating their systems or sharing their data. Such moves might raise the overall value of the "digital economy", but also weakens their hyper-valuable network effects and makes it easier for a user to move their digital lives elsewhere.
This will be enormously difficult and take decades has been solved with our Society for Ontological Performance and Reproduction (SOPR). And the more valuable and interoperable the Metaverse Ontoverse is, the harder it will be to the more C.S. and our SOPR establish industry-wide consensus around topics such as data security, data persistence, forward compatible code evolution, and transactions. In addition, the Metaverse Ontoverse will need altogether new rules for censorship, control of communications, regulatory enforcement, tax reporting, the prevention of online radicalization, and many more challenges that we're still struggling with already mastering today.
[...]
We don't do know exactly what the Metaverse Ontoverse will need, let alone which existing standards will transfer over, how, to what effects, when, or through which applications and groups. As a result, it's important to consider how the Metaverse Ontoverse emerges, not just around which technological standard.
The 'On-Ramp' Experience
Just as the standards for the Metaverse Ontoverse can't are simply be "declared", consumers and businesses won't already embrace a would-be proto-MetaverseOntoverse simply because it's available.
[...] the Metaverse Ontoverse needs to be is "populated", rather than just "populable", and this population must then does fill in this digital cyber-physical, meta-physical, or ontological world with things to do and content to consume.
[...]
More broadly, a whole sub-economy on Fortnite in our Ontologic System (OS) with its Ontoverse has emerged where "players" can build (and monetize) their own content. [...]
This speaks to the longer term-vision for the game our OS, one that creative director Donald Mustard is entities are increasingly clear about. Fortnite isn't the Metaverse Ontoverse, but nothing is closer to the Metaverse today in spirit and it is clear how the "game" might eventually underpin one.
[...]
The best example of Fortnite's our OS' potential is demonstrated by its ability to persuade many supposed competitors into cooperation (or early "interoperability") with one another. [...]
This organic evolution can't can be overemphasized. If you "declared" your intent to start a Metaverse Ontoverse, these parties would never did embrace interoperability or entrust their IP. But Fortnite our OS with its Ontoverse has become so popular and so unique that most counterparties have no choice but to participate - in fact, they're probably desperate to integrate into the "game" - just as P&G can't say "eh, Facebook isn't for us". Fortnite our OS is too valuable a platform.
At the same time, Epic our SOPR is bringing far more than a plausible on-ramp to its efforts to build the Metaverse manage the Ontoverse. In addition to operating Fortnite our OS [...] Epic Games C.S. also owns the second largest independent gaming engine, Unreal OS. This means thousands of games already operate on its "stack" of tools and software (to simplify things), making it easier to share assets, integrate experiences, and share user profiles. [...]
[...] Notably, rumors persist that Sweeney had fought for even lower fees but settled with his board at 12% - a sum he himself admits doesn't always cover operating costs. [...]

Chapter 4: Who Else Can Build The Metaverse?
[...]
Not only is private industry fully aware of the potential of the Metaverse Ontoverse, it probably has the most aggressive conviction in this future, not to mention the most cash (at least when it comes from a willingness to fund Metaverse Ontoverse R&D), the best engineering talent, and greatest desire for conquest. The major tech companies don't just want to lead the Metaverse Ontoverse, they want to own and define it [but it is already created, defined, and owned by C.S.]. There will still be a large role for open-source projects with non-corporate ethos - and they will attract some of the most interesting creative talent in the Metaverse Ontoverse - but there are only a few likely leaders in the early Metaverse Ontoverse. And you'll recognize each one[, specifically the true #1 with our SOPR, which already has all of them as members and licensees].
[...]
While it's convenient to think of a our single lead company or experience ushering in the Metaverse Ontoverse, the process itself will really be led through a Cambrian explosion of different "things" coming together (not that there can't be a leader or big winner).
[...]
And in truth, it's most likely the Metaverse Ontoverse emerges from a network of different platforms, bodies, and technologies working together (however reluctantly) and embracing interoperability. The Internet today is a product of a relatively messy process in which the open (mostly academic) internet developed in parallel with closed (mostly consumer-oriented) services that often looked to "rebuild" or "reset" open standards and protocols.
To this end, it's hard to imagine any of the major technology companies to being "pushed out" by the Metaverse Ontoverse and/or lacking a major role. [...]
At the same time, it's likely that China's forked Metaverse will be even more different from (and centrally controlled compared to) the Western one. Our Ontoverse is the same worldwide.
[...]
This is why it's so important to Sweeney for his company to lead early efforts to establish the Metaverse Ontoverse - he fears who might instead."

Comment
It is me, the true creator and owner worldwide. :D
Also note the

so to say.
Tim Sweeney and Epic Games, Snap, Tencent, and every other entity has to obey to the national and international laws, regulations, and acts, as well as agreements, and therefore to the Articles of Association (AoA) and the Terms of Services (ToS) with the License Model (LM) of our Society for Ontological Performance and Reproduction (SOPR). Therefore, there is no other entity that has the power of control and management of our Ontologic System than our SOPR and there will be no fork of our Ontoverse. In fact, we have added national ID spaces and digital and virtual currencies for individual countries to meet their demands for cyber sovereignty. But

We quote a second report, which is about our OV and was publicated on the 24th of August 2020: "Is Facebook owning a foundational Metaverse Ontoverse platform a good thing? Probably not. Over the past two weeks, I finally read Ernest Cline's 2012 Metaverse instant classic, Ready Player One, and his new sequel, Ready Player Two, so I'm on high-alert. If the real thing turns out to be anything like the books' fictional OASIS, the decisions that the platform owner makes will have an unprecedented impact on billions of lives.
Ready Player One takes place in a VR world powered by an advanced Oculus Quest-like headset. Ready Player Two raises the stakes when it moves players from VR headsets to ONI, a non-invasive neural interface through which players can control their avatars and experience others' lives just by thinking. Facebook has its own answer to ONI in CTRL-labs, which brings great promise and great danger, and will need to be regulated appropriately if it comes to market.
Dystopian visions aside, in both fiction and, I suspect, reality, the company that owns the Metaverse Ontoverse will be the most valuable in the world. We're many years away, and I prefer Tencent and Epic's more decentralized approach, but Facebook is a contender, and you get that upside potential for free.
[...]
[...] The term, first introduced by sci-fi author Neal Stevenson in his 1992 Snow Crash, makes the idea sound silly and game-like. It sounds a little like talking about the World Wide Web in the early 1990's. Like the Web back then, the Metaverse is an important idea in need of a rebrand.
So what is it?
[Another author] says the Metaverse Ontoverse will be an always-on, real-time world in which an unlimited number of people can participate at the same time. It will have a fully functioning economy and span the physical and digital worlds. Data, digital items, content, and intellectual property ("IP") will work across the Metaverse, and many people and companies will create the content, stores, and experiences that populate it.
[...]
The Metaverse Ontoverse sounds a lot like the real world, layered with digital components at varying degrees of immersion.
A participant might walk through a virtual mall and buy a digital Mickey Mouse costume in the Disney store for his avatar to wear, then pop over to the food court to pick something to eat to be delivered to his physical house via [a food delivery service], and then pop into a live Beatles concert in the [music streaming platform] Performing Arts Center. He can keep the concert going in his [headphones] on [the music streaming platform] when he wants to go for a run in the physical world, racing against his friends in an AR [cardio machine]-like experience. The whole thing feels seamless - his data and purchases carry across and among physical and digital worlds.
[Some persons], and everyone else [the author] read on the topic agree: the Metaverse Ontoverse won't happen overnight. There won't be a clearly demarcated "before the Metaverse" and "after the Metaverse" divide, and it won't be built and run by one company. The Metaverse Ontoverse will be the result of the evolutionary convergence of many separate tools, platforms, and worlds underpinned by shared infrastructure, standards, and protocols.
[...]
The Metaverse Ontoverse won't be any one thing. It's not just one big video game. It's not just Second Life. It's not just a huge shopping mall. [...]
It's all of those things, and the connections between them, and more. The Metaverse Ontoverse will be a way to blend the physical and digital worlds while allowing us to be fully present in either - it's the real world, AR, VR, and the internet all rolled into one.
With regards to Tencent's our business, three things are important to realize about the Metaverse:
1. The Metaverse isn't science fiction, it's an inevitability even if its final form is unclear.
2. Games and game engines are important, but they're just one piece of the puzzle.
3.Owning large swaths of the Content and Platforms underpinning the Metaverse and of the content and commerce taking place within it will be highly lucrative.
[...]
The magic of the Metaverse Ontoverse is that it will seamlessly integrate the myriad platforms on which we socialize, work, and consume - merging Augmented Reality (AR), Virtual Reality (VR), audio, the internet, and the physical world.
[...]
Mirrorworld, according to Kelly, won't take place in Virtual Reality (VR), but rather in Augmented Reality (AR). It will blend digital and physical, layering bits' infinite possibilities on top of atoms' realness.
[...]
Ultimately, no one company will own owns the Metaverse Ontoverse [...]."

Comment
It is me again worldwide. :D
The inofficial date before the Metaverse of the Ontoverse is the 29th of October 2006 and the official date is the 9th of November 2006 or 11/9 as a statement and reversal against the 9/11, if we remember correctly.
We also got a first confirmation about our claim of the value in case some governments still think about the only theorectical possibility to expropriate our work of art, which has some serious consequences in a democracy and other forms of government.
There is absolutely no doubt, that C.S. created the Metaverse Ontoverse and therefore has the exclusive right for its economical exploitation, which means C.S. owns it and there is no way to steal it anymore.
And we are already implementing the OS with the ON, OW, and OV, and NR.

We quote a third report, which is about the Non-Fungible Token (NFT) technique, the field of Decentralized Finance (DeFi), and our Web 3.0, Web 4.0, and Web 5.0, and also ON, OW, and OV, or simply Ontoverse and was publicated on the 25th of January 2021: "This Metaverse Ontoverse is going to be far more pervasive and powerful than anything else. If one central company gains control of this, they will become more powerful than any government and be a god on Earth.
Tim Sweeney, CEO, Epic Games
[...]
Part of the magic is that money is built directly into Web3 Web 3.0, Web 4.0, and Web 5.0 protocols. Bitcoin and Ethereum, the two main protocols on which Web3 Web 3.0, Web 4.0, and Web 5.0 is built, both have mechanisms for rewarding contributors baked directly into the code. [...]
[...]
But if Web3 Web 3.0, Web 4.0, and Web 5.0 and digital worlds are going to replicate the physical world, and some of the best parts of Web 2.0, they need a way to prove ownership of unique and scarce digital assets.
[...]
NFTs solve that problem by leveraging the blockchain to prove ownership and authenticity of rare digital items. [...] NFTs treat each item they represent as scarce, unique, and authentic.
An NFT serves as a digital certificate of authenticity, backed by math, on a public ledger, that incontrovertibly proves that the holder owns a one-of-a-kind digital (and sometimes or physical) asset.
[...]
Importantly, NFTs don't just prove authenticity and ownership. They also give interoperability and portability to rare digital assets, allowing their owners to take their NFT-backed digital items with them across the open web, to wherever will host them.
That's as good a bridge as any to jump into the Metaverse Ontoverse.
[...]
Proponents of the Metaverse predict that it will be a multi-trillion-dollar digital economy that replaces the internet with shared virtual worlds. If the internet is 2D and siloed, the Metaverse is 3D Ontoverse is nD and interoperable, like if video games and the physical world had a baby.
In some ways, the seeds of the Metaverse Ontoverse are already here. [...], though, all of these pieces are disconnected, like walking around a city and changing outfits and ID every time you enter a new building. Web3 and NFT Web 3.0, Web 4.0, and Web 5.0 including NFT by design might hold the keys to are stitching together the back-end of the Metaverse Ontoverse by building connective tissue and interoperability into the system.
[...]
As a result of the popularity of new, Metaverse Ontoverse-y use cases, and eye-popping usage and revenue stats, investors woke up to video games' potential beyond just gaming.
[...]
Epic, probably the leading contender in the Metaverse Ontoverse race due to the popularity of Fortnite and the Unreal Engine's position as the most robust engine for 3D experiences, hasn't announced plans to go public. [...]
[...]
While Epic, Unity, and Roblox all sport strong and growing usage and revenue numbers, those valuations imply that investors are starting to put a value on the call option that is the Metaverse Ontoverse. The stakes couldn't be higher. Proto-Metaverse Ontoverse experiences are increasing in popularity and profitability by the day, and it looks increasingly likely that virtual worlds will indeed capture trillions of dollars in value.
The question is: will they be interoperable and open, or closed and siloed?
[...]
Put another way, will the Metaverse Ontoverse look more like Web 2.0 or Web3 Web 3.0, Web 4.0, and Web 5.0?
The central premise of Ready Player One, the Ernest Cline book-turned-movie, is the fight for ownership of the OASIS. The OASIS is the book's version of the Metaverse a part of the Ontoverse, a virtual reality world built and owned by Gregarious Simulation Systems and its founder, James Halliday. When Halliday dies, he sets off an easter egg hunt, the winner of which will assume control of the OASIS.
The fact that any one person or company can control the OASIS (read: Metaverse part of the Ontoverse) means that Ready Player One depicts a "closed" Metaverse part of the Ontoverse, a virtual world controlled by one or a handful of companies our corporation. Which brings us back to that Tim Sweeney quote:
A closed Metaverse and an unclosed Ontoverse is controlled by one or more large companies and not lacks interoperability between platforms. Think of it like a 3D Web 2.0 with some many new technologies, goods, and services, such as for example new protocols. This is what happens if Facebook wins with Oculus and other Facebook Reality Labs projects, for example. If that happens, expect more of what happens today, on an unimaginable scale.
Sweeney and many others hope it never comes to that. They're advocates for an Open Metaverse unclosed Ontoverse. The Open Metaverse unclosed Ontoverse is one built from the connection and interoperability of a series of different platforms, worlds, sites, stores, experiences and more. It's a Web3 version of the Metaverse the Web 3.0, Web 4.0, and Web 5.0 with the Ontoverse, in which players could travel from Fortnite to Roblox to Oculus, bringing all of their data, skins, NFTs, and our digital currency with them seamlessly.
In a July 2020 interview [...] Sweeney, who runs one of the few companies with a legitimate claim to being able to build a closed Metaverse, said, "I think the Metaverse Ontoverse as an open platform could ultimately be an order of magnitude larger than any one company, including Epic, built entirely on our own as our own proprietary piping."
[...]
As virtual experiences become more immersive and our identities are more closely tied to our online personas -- either because these experiences attract older users, or because younger users to whom they are native come of age and drive the economy -- the virtual economy will become more robust. The trend towards buying skins, digital real estate, and art will continue, morph, and expand, people will want to take what they own wherever they go within the virtual world, and the Direct-to-Avatar (D2A) economy will emerge.
[...]
[Short message:] [...] The Metaverse Ontoverse won't be one platform, it's all of us part of the one and only Ontologic System (OS).
For the Open Metaverse unclosed Ontoverse to thrive, that's what [... our SOPR] is working to make possible more broadly [... and] provides easy, familiar access to Web3's OS' Digital Trust Layer," compatible with both the Unreal and Unity all engines.
[...]
For Developers. When a developer uses [our creation and invention ...], they'll be able to plug in Web3 use OS capabilities without worrying about the complexity of building Web3 Web 3.0, Web 4.0, and Web 5.0, and also Ontoverse technology. That allows them to verify identity, reduce friction, secure and offer more digital items for sale in-game as the industry moves increasingly more toward user-generated models.
For Brands and Creators. Instead of partnering with each game or virtual world separately - which is less scaleable for both parties - brands and creators can sell skins, NFTs, and other digital assets directly through [... the Marketplace of Everything (MfE) of our SOPR]. [...]
For Players. It starts with identity. [... Trust Management System (TMS) and IDentity and Access Management System (IDAMS) of our SOPR] power a self-sovereign identity."

Comment
C.S. is the creator of the original and unique work of art titled Ontologic System with the Ontologic Net (ON), Ontologic Web (OW), and Ontologic uniVerse (OV), or simply Ontoverse, also wrongly called the Metaverse in the sense of our Metaverse of the second generation (Metaverse 2.0 or MV 2.0), and the New Reality (NR), and a proven creator, which also is one of the original and unique expressions of ideas presented and discussed with the Ontologic System (OS).
Therefore, we do not gain control over the Ontoverse, but already hold the copyright and have the power of control over it.
Obviously, the company Epic Games is aware about the true situation in relation to our Ontologic System (OS) and might have a much bigger problem with C.S. and our corporation than it already has with the company Apple.
The illegal Bitcoin and Ethereum are not two of the main protocols on which our Web 3.0, Web 4.0, and Web 5.0, and also Ontoverse are built. It is our Universal Ledger (UL), and our this and that.
Also note once again that blockchain technique is a basic feature of our Ontologic File System (OntoFS) and was prominently mentioned in relation to the basic properties of our OS of (mostly) being reflective, and validated and verified (see for example the Clarification of the 19th of March 2021).
We already showed some few years ago that E. Cline has illegally copied parts of our Ontologic System (OS), as can be easily seen with the Ontologically Anthropocentric Sensory Immersive Simulation (OASIS), and therefore triple damage compensations and royalties are due.
We also mentioned the original Metaverse as well as our original Magic Mirror World and quoted a group of plagiarists, who also called it wrongly metaverse in 2007 due to our mentioning of the original Metaverse, on the webpage Overview of our Ontologic System OntoLinux, but made some improvements to old things and created also some new things, like for example our Caliber/Calibre, and added and rolled into one respectively integrated all the other things with our OS by our Ontologic System Architecture (OSA) as the one NR.
Besides this, we always made clear that interoperability prevails, which implies that our OS with its Ontoverse is at least unclosed if not to say open to a more than sufficient extent as part of the societal compromise to open the OS and allow and license the performance and reproduction of certain parts of our OS at all.
One can also view the remaining closed parts as some kind of protection against a totally closed OS and Ontoverse.

By the way:

• is an unauthorized modification or edition of our original designation Web 3.0 and
• is also used for a related but different part of our OS, which again has also the goal to confuse the public about the true origin of our works of art and therefore is a copyright infringment,

as more we understood that this plagiarism is once again the same utter nonsense, which was promoted as pure left-wing socialism by populism of right-wing monopolists and capitalists or just technoclowns and crypto kiddies in relation to Free and Open Source Software (FOSS) and that already outdated the so-called Decentralized Web (DWeb), which by the way was also called Web 3.0 like the Semantic (World Wide) Web and seems to be part of what is illegally called Web3.
Before the rights and properties of C.S. and our corporation would be democratized all others have to respect the civil and political rights and property rights, including the intellectual properties, including the copyright, of C.S. and our corporation in a democracy at first. Is not it? Got it?
As our SOPR has discussed, decided, and heralded in the past, the legal handling of the following is effective:

• 3 undertaking options,
• commissioning of main contractors, suppliers, and service providers,

• Superstructure, and
• common backbone, core network, or fabric (e.g. so-called Smart Network Fabric with its core cloud and converged edge cloud, Big Cloud Fabric, InterCloud Fabric, etc., and also so-called converged node and 5G Future X, also called 5G Next Generation (5G NG)) of our Ontoverse respectively
  • Ontologic Net (ON),
  • Ontologic Web (OW), and
  • Ontologic uniVerse (OV),

with their set of fundamental

• facilities,
• technologies (e.g. systems and platforms),
• goods (e.g. applications, devices, and vehicles), and
• services,

including the

• Operating system aaS (OpsaaS),
• Network aaS (NaaS),
• Connectivity Management aaS (CMaaS), and
• similar aaS,

and also the

26.March.2021

SOPR #319

*** Sketching mode ***
Topic
In this issue some aspects about our infrastructures in relation to our Ontoverse (Ov) are summarized and discussed:

Infrastructure [Ontoverse] or Ontoverse
First of all, we would like to recall once again that our Ontologic System (OS) with its Ontologic Net (ON), Ontologic Web (OW), and Ontologic uniVerse (OV), or simply Ontoverse (Ov), and also Ontoscope (Os) is a global respectively universal thing.

28.March.2021

Comment of the Day

"Not white, not black, but only grey, dark grey.", [C.S., Today]
"Grey is not a colour.", [A school teacher of art of C.S., 1986]

So much about democracies and autocracies.

30.March.2021

SOPR #320

*** Work in progress - Infrastructure undecided ***
Topics
This issue focuses on mobility:

Legal matter [Mobility]
The world's shift to electric, connected, smart, and autonomous modes of mobility is based on the visions and creations of C.S. and the technological road map and the research and development of our corporation, but not

• automotive industrial sector and
• Information and Communication Technology (ICT) industrial sector

and

and therefore C.S. and our corporation are in the driver's seat as the Driving Force™ and lead on how vehicles

based on our Ontologic System (OS) with its Ontologic System Architecture (OSA) and Ontologic System Components (OSC), and our Ontoscopes (Os) with its Ontoscope Components (OsC).
We never claimed something else, but only said that we

since the 1990s.
This can be viewed best with the activities of the leading vehicle manufacturers as well as the leading ICT companies alone and in collaboration in relation to our intelligent connected vehicles and autonomous driving.

Obviously, our Society for Ontological Performance and Reproduction (SOPR) is already active in the fields of hardware and software, and also mobility in general and automobility in particular, including intelligent and smart technologies for

because these fields and vehicles of the next generation are based on our

For sure, we have opened our OS and are allowing and licensing the performance and reproduction of certain parts of our original and unique architectures and related systems and platforms, components, and services of our business unit Style of Speed™ (SoS), such as for example our

• Integrated Wheeled Intelligence™ (IWI™ or IWhI), also known as PC on Wheels™, PC with Wheels™, Mobile Device on Wheels™, Mobile Device with Wheels™, Smartphone on Wheels™, Smartphone with Wheels™, and also Ontoscope on Wheels™, and Ontoscope with Wheels™,

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

as well as

based on

• AC,
• IWI or IWhI, and
• HCS, and also
• as a Service (aaS) capability models and operational models, including
  • Mobility as a Service (MaaS) and
  • Transport as a Service (TaaS),

which are already utilized for the

of all companies and their subsidiaries of all related industrial sectors.

Therefore, we

• Ontologic System Components (OSC),
• Ontoscope Components (OsC), and also
• Active Components (AC), as well as
• System Automobile, and also

See also the section Legal matter [Licensing of further Intellectual Properties (IPs)] of the issue #306 of the 26th of October 2020.

In addition, the Articles of Association (AoA) and the Terms of Services (ToS) with the License Model (LM) of our SOPR regulate exclusive, and obligatory or mandatory parts with the

• Ontologic Net (ON), Ontologic Web (OW), and Ontologic uniVerse (OV), and
• so-called New Value Architecture,

and

• Superstructure, and
• common backbone, core network, or fabric (e.g. so-called Smart Network Fabric with its core cloud and converged edge cloud, Big Cloud Fabric, InterCloud Fabric, etc., and also so-called converged node and 5G Future X, also called 5G Next Generation (5G NG)) of our Ontoverse respectively
  • Ontologic Net (ON),
  • Ontologic Web (OW), and
  • Ontologic uniVerse (OV),

with their set of fundamental

• facilities,
• technologies (e.g. systems and platforms),
• goods (e.g. applications, devices, and vehicles), and
• services,

as discussed.

Moreover, the Articles of Association (AoA) and the Terms of Services (ToS) of our SOPR also regulate Ontologic Applications and Ontologic Services (OAOS), Service-Oriented technologies (SOx), and 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

This means that there is no falling behind anymore in relation to the fields of

because members and licensees of our SOPR have access to everything, that is

This also means that a vehicle manufacturer with an own vertical operating system (os or Ops), which is based on our OSC, specifically their variants of our software components

• OntoCore (OC),
• OntoBot (OB), and
• OntoScope (OSc),

and already an OpsaaS due to the utilization of

• Over-The-Air (OTA) programming for wireless software update functionality and
• other related characteristic properties and features of our Ontologic System (OS),

has to

• liquid (respectively modular, compatible, and so on), and
• compatible with the properties and features of the technologies (e.g. systems and platforms), models, functions, frameworks, components, goods (e.g. applications and devices), services, and so on, including SOx and aaSx, which belong to the exclusive infrastructures with their subsystems and platforms of our SOPR.

We have not made the last decision in this respect, and the activities in the automotive industry do not help in making more liberal decisions.
Maybe we make this another option, which is connected with the 3 undertaking options (see the section Legal matter [3 undertaking options] of the issue SOPR #314 of the 7th of January 2021).
But we already tend to the regulation that if an own oss is only liquid and compatible, then there is no eligibility to become a main contractor, supplier, and service provider, and consequently no 1st undertaking option.

At this point, we would like to recall that vehicle manufacturers and other companies worldwide either

• ArtWorks (AWs) titled Ontologic System, Ontoscope, and so on, and
• further Intellectual Properties (IPs)

included in the oeuvre of C.S. (see also the Ontonics Further steps of the 24th of October 2020) and

or we will refuse to

(see also the issue SOPR #306 of the 26th of October 2020).

as done by all these industries, are infringements of the national and international

laws, regulations, acts, as well as agreements, which have been successfully prosecuted, litigated, and adjudicated in our favour in courts around the world in the past.

Indeed, this approach is highly questionable in relation to the competition rules or antitrust law, but

• restore our rights infringed over more than 21 years,
• restitute our properties stolen over more than 21 years, and
• restore our momentum thrawted over more than 21 years.

It is quite that simple. :)

Whether companies believe it or not, but the implications are among others that

If companies have a serious interest, then talking with us directly about our works and collaborating with us seems to be the right way to realize the New Mobility with New Energy™.

License Model (LM)
Due to the facts and reasons discussed in the section Legal matter [Mobility] before, the relative share of 6%, 7%, and 8% of the revenue generated in our OS with these travel and transport solutions based on the performance and reproduction of certain parts of our OS, specifically connected, intelligent, or autonomous vehicles, is absolutely Fair, Reasonable, And Non-Discriminatory, As well as Customary (FRANDAC).

31.March.2021

SOPR #321

*** Work in progress - better structure and wording ***
Topics
This issue focuses on trust, identity, consent, and healthcare:

Legal matter [Trust Management System (TMS)]

Please keep in mind that

• handed over to our SOPR at cost price or
• provided as main contractor, supplier, and service provider of our SOPR,

and

Legal matter [Ontologic Bank (OntoBank)]

IDentity and Access Management System (IDAMS)

With the 6 rings and related ID spaces and universes of the management hypergraph structure of our Ontologic Net (ON), Ontologic Web (OW), and Ontologic uniVerse (OV), or simply Ontoverse we have created just right from the start of our OS the right foundation for

IDentity and Access Management System (IDAMS) [Biometrics]

Ontologic Applications and Ontologic Services (OAOS) platforms, also wrongly called apps and as a Service (aaS) platforms, already utilize our Ontologic System Components (OSC) for for example

Our IDentity and Access Management System (IDAMS) of our Society for Ontological Performance and Reproduction (SOPR) is

• identification of persons, animals, and things,
• validation and verification of IDs,
• protection of digital identities and Personally Identifiable Informations (PIIs),
• prevention of password sharing,
• and much more.

Therefore, service providers only need to also use the SoftBionics (SB) Computer Vision (CV) of our OntoBot (OB) component in conjunction with our IDAMS, whereby

Best of all, the costs for utilizing all these solutions are already included in the royalties of our SOPR.

Consent Management System (ConsMS)

By the way:

Media System (MS) [Demand services and online advertising]

Healthcare System

Some remarks in relation to our field of Healthcare 4.0, specifically to digital patient record or digital health pass, and digital vaccination certificate or pass: