11:49 UTC+1
Assistants, agents, bots based on OM, OB, etc.

Ontologic Model (OM)
Ontologic roBot (OB or OntoBot)

There is only one original.
Therefore, there is no discussion about the worldwide exclusive rights and properties of C.S. and our corporation with any entitiy, including companies and illegal monopolies, like for example Meta and Amazon.

Therefore, they have absolutely no other chance to get the

than to sign, pay, and comply with the

which requires the

• Media System (MS),
• Video Game System (VGS),
• Online Advertising System (OAdvS),
• Electronic Commerce (EC) with Marketplace for Everything (MfE),
• and other Ontologic Applications and Ontologic Services (OAOS) subsystems and platforms,

and

• facilities (e.g. buildings, data centers, exchange points or hubs, and transmission lines),
• technologies (e.g. (sub)systems (e.g. backbones, core networks, or fabrics, and satellite constellations), platforms, etc.),
• goods (e.g. applications, devices, robots, and vehicles), and
• services (e.g. as a Service (aaS) business, capability, and operational models (e.g. (core) Infrastructure as a Service (IaaS), (utility) Technology as a Service (TaaS), (utility) Platform as a Service (PaaS), Service as a Service (SaaS), Data as a Service (DaaS), Trust as a Service (TaaS), SoftBionics as a Service (SBaaS), etc.))

(see the issue SOPR #327 of the 7th of June 2021 for the general architecture and organization, management and operation, and so on) among some other demands and legal requirements, which will become effective in the next weeks.

Therefore, assistants, agents, bots, and so on have to be based on our exclusive and mandatory OM and OB in the legal scope of ... the Ontoverse (Ov).

Sign, pay, comply, or file chapter 11.
Got it? Fine. :)

15:54 and 17:57 UTC+1
Amazon App copyright infringement

Finally, Amazon is on the hook as well and everybody can see how our prey is wriggling and unsuccessfully trying to free itself from the situation.

The (mobile) application of the company Amazon includes a specific conversational virtual assistant, or being more precise a so-called shopping assistant for an Electronic Commerce (EC) platform, which

• ontology,
• Artificial Neural Network Model (ANNM),
• Language Model (LM), and
• ANNLM (e.g. LLM),

• logics,
• Knowledge Representation and Reasoning (KRR) (formalism or semantic structure), and Knowledge Retrieval (KR),
  • Conceptual Graph (CG),
  • Semantic Network (SN),
  • Topic Map (TM),
  • Graph-Based Knowledge Base (GBKB) or Knowledge Graph (KG) (see also search engine, social network),
  • DataBase (DB) (e.g. triple store, product catalog),

  • Deductive DB (DDB) (e.g. Prolog),
  • etc.
• ontology, for example realized as a DB (e.g. triple store, Prolog),
• etc.,

• logics, used for an inference machine (e.g. Prolog),
• generative and creative Bioncs,
• Dialog System (DS or DiaS), including Dialogue Management System (DMS),
• Conversational Interface (CI), Conversational User Interface (CUI), Conversational Human Machine Interface (CHMI), Conversational Human Computer Interface (CHCI), Conversational System (CS or ConS), including Conversational Agent System (CAS or ConAS),
• chatbot,
• etc.,

and

and therefore is one of the many illegal Ontologic Applications and Ontologic Services (OAOS), which do not have the allowance and license for the performance and reproduction of certain parts of our Ontologic System (OS) by our Society for Ontological Performance and Reproduction (SOPR).
In addition, said virtual assistant is

Why Amazon thinks it would be a different situation, if it takes this development step instead of updating its already existing Intelligent Agent System (IAS) (e.g. (voice-based or speech controlled) virtual assistant, Intelligent Personal Assistant (IPA) or Personal Intelligent Assistant (PIA)), remains a riddle, because it does not improve its legal position.

The keywords showing the issue are

and therefore

The rejection of the rule-based law and order environment was never more obvious and provable in court, and of course we will exploit this situation maximally, as it is considered to be Fair, Reasonable, And Non-Discriminatory, As well as Customary (FRANDAC) in Silicon Valley, on Silicon Alley, and at other locations.

Just as there will be no Metaverse, there will be no Amazon OS.

See also the note

and the other publications cited therein or/and publicized elsewhere on this website of OntomaX.

Checkmate. Game over.
Sign, pay, comply, or file chapter 11.
Got it? Fine. :)

20:19 UTC+1
Ontonics Further steps

We are very pleased to announce once again that we have new members in our legal team, who have proven their competences as well, specifically as absolute experts in the field of apportionment of Intellectual Property (IP) to the

by performing and reproducing our Evoos and our OS in whole or in part, so that we will find the higher of them or the sum of 2 or more of them under Fair, Reasonable, And Non-Discriminatory, As well as Customary (FRANDAC) terms and conditions.

In the next future, we will look for highly competent consultors to manage and execute the reconstitution, restoration, and restitution, and also transition processses.
Eventually, the so-called Cloud, Metaverse, genAI, chatbot, and all of the other rights and properties of C.S. and our corporation come back to us, where they always belong to. :)

19:52 and 28:51 UTC+1
Parts of EU AI Act unconstitutional

European Union (EU)
Artificial Intelligence Act (AI Act)

The European Commission (EC) and the member states of the European Union (EU) reached another peak of impudence.

We quote and translate a report, which is about the AI Act of the EU and our Ontologic roBot (OB or OntoBot), our generative and creative Bionics, our coherent Ontologic Model (OM), and our Trustworthy Artificial Intelligence (TAI): "[...]
[... the F.R.German] digital minister [...] gave up his opposition a few days ago. Gritting his teeth - this is probably how his statement on [a social network platform] can be understood:
"The compromise reached on the AI Act now lays the foundation for the development of trustworthy AI. We will use the maximum leeway and avoid overregulation so that our location can be competitive and value creation takes place here."
[...]

AI foundation models to be given duties
This contains his criticism of the planned handling of the so-called AI foundation models. These are technological foundations, on which a wide variety of [Ontologic] applications [and Ontologic Services (OAOS)] can be built. [A partial plagiarism of our Evolutionary operating system (Evoos) and our Ontologic roBot (OB or OntoBot) with our generative and creative Bionics], for example, is the basic model that powers [a partial plagiarism of our OntoBot], probably the most famous chatbot in the world.
In Europe, these basic models are to be assigned certain duties depending on the risk class, for example when passing on information, analyzing risks, and documenting the data used to train the AI.
To ensure that this approach does not dampen innovation in Europe [the F.R.German digital minister]'s party colleague [...], who helped negotiate the AI Act in the EU Parliament for years, said that it was now crucial: "... that open questions are clarified, for example how the classification of basic models in the risk system works in practice - according to which criteria should this be done." The commission must now also ensure clarity when it comes to AI in law enforcement, so that different national interpretations do not create any legal loopholes.

[...]
[...] start-up association [...]

Training and testing AI models
A line that Commission President von der Leyen is also pursuing: AI start-ups and Small and Medium-sized Enterprises (SMEs) are now to be given access to EU supercomputers, i.e. the necessary capacities to train, develop, and test their AI models:
"This is similar to what Microsoft is doing for [a partial plagiarism of our Evoos and our OntoBot] by letting them use its own supercomputers. We will also put common European data rooms at the service of start-ups and make huge amounts of data available in all EU languages so that AI also works for non-English speakers."
[...]"

Comment
First of all, we note that the so-called AI foundation models are Artificial Neural Network (ANN) Language Models (LMs) (ANNLMs) (e.g. Large Language Models (LLMs)), which are part of our coherent Ontologic Model (OM), like Capability and Operational Models (COMs) and Cognitive Models (CMs), and are the basis for our generative and creative Bionics, which all are part of original and unique, unforeseeable and unexpected, personal, copyrighted, prohibited for fair use, and already iconic expressions of idea respectively masterpieces titled Evolutionary operating system (Evoos) and Ontologic System (OS), and created by C.S., which again are protected by the national and international laws, regulations, and acts, as well as agreements, conventions, and charters, specifically the copyright law, which again are even effective in the EU.

Everybody should be able to see that this is not the comprise anymore, which we made for opening our OS and allowing and licensing the performance and reproduction of certain parts of our OS and comprised for example the utilization of the infrastructues of of our SOPR and our other Societies with their set of fundamental and essential

• facilities (e.g. buildings, data centers, exchange points or hubs, and communication channels),
• technologies (e.g. (sub)systems, platforms, and backbones, core networks, or fabrics),
• goods (e.g. applications, devices, robots, and vehicles), and
• services

including our

We also explained that the management and orchestration, and also the operation of our OS is highly expensive and we have opened its related fundamental and essential infrastructures more than sufficiently enough, so that

See also the notes

and the other publications cited therein or/and publicized elsewhere on this website of OntomaX.

Furthermore, introducing a law, which addresses only one individual member of the society, is unconstitutional, if it is not a special law regarding this individual member explicitly, and it is even more illegal, if such an already capricious law reduces a basic freedom such as the freedom of expression, specifically the artistic freedom, in case this individual member is a living artist.
But the so-called Artificial Intelligence Act (AI Act) of the European Union (EU) does exactly this to same extent in relation to the original and unique ArtWorks (AWs) and further Intellectual Properties (IPs) included in the oeuvre of C.S..

Even more curious and ridiculous are the points that the EC and its member states are not only supporting the bad actors once again, they are now even acting like the bad actors, and they are thinking that we, C.S. and our corporation with its Society for Ontological Performance and Reproduction (SOPR), would support them in

• Evoos with its Our Evolutionary operating system Architecture (EosA), coherent OM, including ANNLM (e.g. LLM), and
• OS with its Ontologic System Architecture (OSA), basic properties of (mostly) being validated and verified, OntoBot component, generative and creative Bionics, Trustworthy Artificial Intelligence (TAI), which is required to put that AI Act into practice, and so on, and
• SOPR,

And why we have the impression, that we hear their lobbyists in this relation all the time, should also become obvious, because the goals, actions, and arguments of the governments, commissions, federal authorities and agencies, and companies concerned against C.S. and our corporation are the same, and they collaborate, which shows the conspiracy and plot against us.
Instead of conspiring and plotting against C.S. and our corporation together with its lobbyists, like for example the companies Microsoft, Amazon, Alphabet (Google), Meta (Facebook), SAP, Bayerische Motorenwerke, Porsche SE/Volkswagen, Siemens, Deutsche Telekom, and so on, the corrupt entities in Europe, North America, and Great Britain should better begin to

• national and international laws, regulations, and acts, as well as agreements, conventions, and charters,
• rights and properties of C.S. and our corporation, and
• Fair, Reasonable, And Non-Discriminatory, As well as Customary (FRANDAC) Terms of Service (ToS) with the License Model (LM) of our Society for Ontological Performance and Reproduction (SOPR).

We will not study the 892 pages of that AI Act, but do enjoy our freedoms and exclusive rights and properties worldwide, even in the member states of the EU, and if there is any contradiction, then we leave it up to the European governments to revise their AI Act, Digital Market Act, and so on, as we leave it up to the other governments to do so as well. :)
All these acts do not provide and guarantee 100% legal certainty.

Last but not least, any construct like a national cloud, national Artificial Intelligence (AI), and all that other national nonsense will not change the fact that there is only one Ontologic System (OS) and this is our OS, and that our OS defines respectively rules what is in the legal scope of ... the Ontoverse (Ov) and what is not.

06.February.2024

14:03 UTC+1
GB 1.0 strategy does not work without OS

We are observing that individual companies and organizations are implementing infrastructures, Service-Oriented technologies (SOx), Ubiquitous Computing (UbiC) and Internet of Things (IoT), Cyber-Physical System (CPS), and Networked Embedded System (NES), SuperComputing (SC or SupC), etc. by following the Global Brain of the first generation (GB 1.0) metaphor, hypothesis, vision, idea, or genre with the goal to implement proprietary variants of our Ontologic System (OS) and to circumvent the rights and properties of C.S. and our corporation. Needless to say, both is a no go.

In fact, another more detailed review showed once again that very much is missing in the GB 1.0, which we all have added with the creation of our original and unique masterpieces Evoos and OS.
Eventually, the GB 1.0 is around

• Ontologic Net (ON), including our Interconnected supercomputer (Intersup),
• Ontologic Web (OW), including our Universal Brain Space (UBS) or Global Brain of the second generation (GB 2.0), and formerly Global Brain Grid (GBG), and
• Ontologic uniVerse (OV), including our eXtended Mixed Reality and something totally new.

See also the notes

14:14 and 14:44 UTC+1
Monopoly card is already golden exit

See also the Picture of the Day of the 27th of October 2019.
Needed and sold respectively bartered for damages and so on.
They must pay their share as well, when selling shares.

Some founders, shareholders, investors, politicians, and commissioners, as well as journalists have already understood their legal situation, some few others seem to be unteachable.

21:34 and 22:32 UTC+1
Meta (Facebook) totally incompetent

We can only repeat 2 points:

• social media,
• Mixed Reality (MR),
• utilization of our Ontoverse (Ov), generative and creative Bionics, and Large Language Model (LLM),
• children,
• data protection or privacy, and data security,
• press,
• election,
• democracy,
• freedom,
• and so on.

In fact, Meta (Facebook) must be at least 3 times larger and its costs must be at least 3 times higher to really provide a safe and secure environment: 1 part for the social network and 2 parts for safety and security. And even this is not enough.
But we already do know that service providers put profit above all else. It is exactly the same thinking, which we do see in the Palestine region. They give a damn on the rights and properties of others.

Only our Ontologic System (OS) and our Society for Ontological Performance and Reproduction (SOPR) can help here. Our OS cannot be stolen, legally operated and provided, and financed by other entities.
As usual, no joke, no marketing, no blah blah blah,

Do not be fooled.

07.February.2024

08:12, 09:00, and 10:42 UTC+1
Everything related to OM, etc. blacklisted

Ontologic Model (OM)

Our

• Capability and Operational Model (COM),
• connectionist (neural) probabilistic language model respectively Artificial Neural Network (ANN) Language Model (LM) (ANNLM), including
  • what is wrongly called Large Language Model (LLM)),
• etc,

• Ontologic Net (ON), including our Interconnected supercomputer (Intersup),
• Ontologic Web (OW), including our Universal Brain Space (UBS) or Global Brain of the second generation (GB 2.0), and formerly Global Brain Grid (GBG), and
• Ontologic uniVerse (OV), including our eXtended Mixed Reality and something totally new,

belong to the exclusive and mandatory infrastructures of our Society for Ontological Performance and Reproduction (SOPR) and our other Societies and will be provided with the related subsystems and platforms, including the

The problems of all those entities are our ideas and genres of our original and unique, scientifically fictitious, unforeseeable and unexpected, personal, copyrighted, prohibited for fair use, and already iconic, sui generis expressions of idea respectively works of art respectively masterpieces titled Evolutionary operating system (Evoos) and Ontologic System (OS), and created by C.S., which first and foremost are

and also

as well as

and then come the fields of

expressed on the basis of the fields of

C.S. was simply pouring out about how we see, organize, improve, and create all these related things, us, the others, the world, and so on. We just looked at the matters and then created our things.
We also knew to be quite good, but we never thought to be so genious that the whole world is spying on us and following us. In fact, we always thought that others have had done most of the work, but even until recently we learned how singular, original and unique our works of art truly are, specifically in relation to Artificial Intelligence (AI), Computational Intelligence (CI), Machine Intelligence (MI), Emotional (Intelligence (EI), and all the other related fields and technologies.
We were also sure that many others would find favour and pleasure with our creations. We also always believed in a certain success, but never that people would actually take everything from us at face value and even realize it 1:1.
Nevertheless, the scientific fields, technologies, machines, etc. are simply tools for expression and the rest is a by-product of the artistic output.

In addition, we do have exclusive moral rights respectively Lanham (Trademark) rights.
Anything performed and reproduced with a substantial similarity and with the goal to interfere with, and also obstruct, undermine, and harm said exclusive rights (e.g. exploitation (e.g. capitalization (e.g. monetization))) is prohibited for this reason as well.

The societies cannot afford to allow others to make the same mistakes with our

that they made before again and again with

and our

Those bad actors are not allowed to use our Evoos and our OS in whole or in part, and they are not competent and not qualified to do this job. The whole world can already observe that they only mimic and simulate C.S. and our corporation, but have absolutely no clue about what they are stealing from us and doing with it. Obviously, that mimicking and stealing is not enough and does not work anymore.
But nobody should cherish an illusion and draw a wrong conclusion in relation to what we do, because

We have worked, we have created, and we have done everything in the right way, which is what all the bad actors are rejecting to do.

Do not fall prey. All those scandals will not repeat, as made crystal clear since 1 year.
We are already enforcing the rights and properties of C.S. and our corporation.
The companies will get a set of legal documents in the very next future beginning with the large companies.
The large illegal monopolies get no more mass to grow their monopolies and protect their walled gardens.
The small illegal booths get no access to the exclusive and mandatory infrastructures of our SOPR and our other Societies.
And all of them do not need to argue about freedom of choice, innovation and experimentation, compatibility and interoperability, and competition pro bono publico==for the public good. In this case, we have already proven to be the only ones.
Therefore, they have to

or otherwise a public benefit never arises.
Furthermore, they are the ones, who are doing everything to protect their core businesses and walled gardens.

We have a huge amount of legal ammunition, which puts us into the very favourable position to get preliminary injunctions even without having to make deposits, and cease and desist orders.
We have also made clear that cashing out does not work, because founders and shareholders have obmitted referencing respectively citation with attribution, mandatory reporting, and so on to increase and manipulate the business values, and are doing insider trading or dealing deliberately since several years.
And we can only repeat that we have prepared this situation since around 18 years and are working on these legal procedures right now.

Do not invest in fraudulent and even serious criminal start-ups, newly founded stock corporations, and other scam in the legal scope of ... the Ontoverse (Ov). They do not have any rights and properties required, or simply said they do not have legal certainty.

Just a reminder.
We have blacklisted every better known fraudulent and even serious criminal entity in this relation and will blacklist even more whenever we will get knowledge about them.

No allowance and license for Ontologic System (OS)
No Ontologic Net (ON), Ontologic Web (OW), and Ontologic uniVerse (OV)
No Ontologic Applications and Ontologic Services (OAOS)
No Ontologic Model (OM)
No generative and creative Bionics
No connectivity
No exchange
No, Nix, Nada, Nothing
In the legal scope of ... the Ontoverse (Ov), also known as OntoLand, generative and creative Bionic tools, chatbots, and other plagiarisms and fakes of our Ontologic System Components (OSC) are absolutely useless and are only a gamble of hot air.

When we say it is over, then it is over.

19:14 UTC+1
EU banks must use OntoPay for OAOS and mobile pay

European Union (EU)
Ontologic Payment System (OPS or OntoPay)
Ontologic Applications and Ontologic Services (OAOS)

With the new directive of the European Parliament of the European Union, banks have to make a bank transfer in 10 seconds, which requires that a transaction has to be done in near real-time, which again requires that banks utilize our

of the exclusive and mandatory infrastructures of our Society for Ontological Performance and Reproduction (SOPR) for their

which again requires that banks comply to the

Even better, our OFinS and TMS together provide an intermediary transaction clearing house service based on our UL as somekind of a buffer in case a payment has to be reversed, because it was made

which allows a rollback in virtually all cases, if desired and demanded by users respectively customers.

Foreign Payment System Providers (PSPs) only need to do so as well, which they have to do so anyway.

08.February.2024

12:24 UTC+1
SOPR demands CSPs to stop SBaaSx for start-ups

SOPR
Cloud Service Provider (CSP)
SoftBionics (SB) as a Service (aaS) technologies (SBaaX)

Our SOPR demands so-called CSPs to stop the provision of SBaaXs for fraudulent and even serious criminal start-ups, including those very well known companies and satellite start-ups, which are

We will do this in the next weeks anyway.
We also recall that all SBaaSX are part of the exclusive and mandatory infrastructures of our SOPR and our other Societies.

11.February.2024

14:58 UTC+1
Ontonics Further steps

We made some decisions regarding the various businesses respectively business units, including our SOPR, and also the markets, economies, and eventually the whole planet Earth, specifically regarding general aspects, including areas of competence, responsibilities, etc., and particular aspects, including technologies, goods, and services, with the goals to increase the efficiencies, performances, and synergies of our partners and our corporation, and also the benefits of the public.

16:12 UTC+1
SOPR Further steps

We got new insights, which

• strengthen our legal position and lengthen our legal lever even more, and
• show our success and revolution once agian.

In relation to the discounts, we have also come to the following conclusiion:
If governments, commissions, and federal authorities accept the reconstitution, restoration, and restitution, and also transition processes without any friction, which they have to do anyway, because

then the discount connected with the abolition of illegal monopolies will not be required anymore and will be removed completely.

In case of a the establishment of a new company as joint venture respectively execution of a company takeover or merger we will not set a period of reflection and a deadline, but only grant sufficient time to cure any formal deficits or carry out / undertake constructive revisions.

We also would like to recall that if an entity holds more than 50% of the voting shares and no blocking minority exists, then said entity makes the decisions.
In this regard, we have to note that this does not mean a board and other entities have no oversight, consulting mandate, and other tasks.

12.February.2024

18:57 and 19:53 UTC+1
AI boom already over

We already said on the 22nd of January 2024 that the AI boom is over: "No AI boom, but AI bubble and scam
If there would still be an AI boom, then it has already been priced in the share prices or market capitalizations, which have even become bubbles.
And shares of chip manufacturers are no safe harbour." In fact, chip manufacturers in the legal scope of ... the Ontoverse (Ov) must also sign, pay, and comply with the

Just manufacturing chips and selling them for access places (e.g. data center, etc.) and access devices (e.g. Ontoscope (Os), vehicle, robot, etc.) in our Ov does not work.
We also would like to recall that the ToS of our SOPR include regulations for the

• triple damage compensations induced, resulting from
  • unpaid royalties for unauthorized performances and reproductions,
  • obmitted referencing respectively citation with attribution, and
  • thwarted, obstructed, blocked, and otherwise missed commercial business possibilities and follow-up opportunities,
• profit generated illegally, or
• value (e.g. share price, market capitalization) increased or gained illegally

by

• performing and reproducing our Evoos and our OS in whole or in part without authorization respectively allowance and license, and
• interfering with, and also obstructing, undermining, and harming the exclusive moral rights respectively Lanham (Trademark) rights of C.S and our corporation,

• moral rights respectively Lanham (Trademark) rights) and
• properties (e.g. copyrights, raw signals and data, digital and virtual assets, and online advertisement estate) of C.S. and our corporation,

which do apply in their cases as well.
All so called clouds come back anyway.

The 2 reasons for the increasing share prices is quite simple:

Also note that the

Furthermore, the money has to be reinvested somehow and eventually this can only be done across the broad public and all sectors, which will result in higher incomes, higher investments in residential buildings, higher this and that, and ultimatively in higher inflation, specifically in North America.

In addition, there will be an inevitable transition process in the course of our reconstitution, restoration, and restitution process followed by a cleanup process. The preparations for these processes are already in full swing.
And about the reasons why the infrastructures of our SOPR and our other Societies are exclusive and mandatory, we really do not need to talk about anymore, but only note that no matter how high the share prices or market capitalizations are, those ICT companies do not get the allowance and license for the performance and reproduction of certain parts of our Ontologic System (OS), which aredirectly connected with these infrastructures, because we will keep the rights and properites of C.S. and our corporation.

We also would like to recall once again that new companies as joint ventures should become business units of our corporation and provide services like a Main Contractor (MC) of our SOPR, but are not our license collecting SOPR.

By the way:

13.February.2024

10:10, 11:33, and 13:33 UTC+1
Damages and admission fees are due

We would like to recall that the due date for the payment of damage compensations, admission fees, outstanding royalties, and so on is the 1st of January 2007 and that in case a statute of limitation applies, for example with an ordinary infringement of the copyrights of C.S., then the admission fee clause becomes effective as compensation for the residual period.
Consequently, the admission fee is also the higher of the apportioned

• unpaid royalties for unauthorized performances and reproductions,
• obmitted referencing respectively citation with attribution, and
• thwarted, obstructed, blocked, and otherwise missed commercial business possibilities and follow-up opportunities,

by performing and reproducing our Evoos and our OS in whole or in part without authorization respectively allowance and license,

Specifically manufacturers of chips used for the

will also have to pay their fair share and comply with the

like any other entity in the legal scope of ... the Ontoverse (Ov).

For sure, we have to adapt the resulting sum to the License Model (LM) of our Society for Ontological Performance and Reproduction (SOPR), because the fee for HardWare (HW) is considerably lower than the fee for Ontologic Applications and Ontologic Services (OAOS). But in many cases, the manufacturers of processors

which means that they are also responsible for

Also note that we do have our own series of

since at least November 2009, so that in this case no discussion is required as well and at all.

Of course, we will establish new companies as joint ventures respectively execute company takeovers or mergers of the companies Nvidia, Intel, Arm Holdings, and Co. due to the unpaid admission fee aligned to the increased value. :)

We are certainly willing to

• facilities (e.g. buildings, data centers, exchange points or hubs, and communication channels),
• technologies (e.g. (sub)systems, platforms, and backbones, core networks, or fabrics),
• goods (e.g. applications, devices, robots, and vehicles), and
• services,

more than sufficiently enough, but we will not allow anyone to

Any resistance or dirty trick against the law and order environment is futile, because we hold the plug, socket, and cable.

11:34 and 15:37 UTC+1
UL is exclusive - Bitcoin is not gold

Our Universal Ledger (UL

Bitcoin is based on our DLT, but related Ontologic Applications and Ontologic Services (OAOS) get no allowance and license for the performance and reproduction of certain parts of our OS from our SOPR and our Ontologic Financial System (OFinS) with its Ontologic Bank (OntoBank).
Therefore, Bitcoin and other cryptocurrencies are fraud and will not become like gold.

If companies sign, pay, and comply with the

then they are egible to provide their own technologies, goods, and services as Main Contractors (MCs) of our SOPR.

But issuers of illegal Exchange-Traded Funds (EFTs) based on illegal cryptocurrencies and builders of an illegal shadow financial system face blacklisting for life, if they continue with their robbery of our digital assets.

21:48 UTC+1
No reasons to be bold for Nvidia, Intel, Arm, and Co.

Pay close attention with demanding the regulation or even the democratization of the original and unique ArtWorks (AWs) and further Intellectual Properties (IPs) included in the oeuvre of C.S..
We all do already know that certain founders and shareholders have only their own interests in mind, when they are

The

are already the compromise found on a local and global democratic basis over several centuries, and the ToS of our SOPR has regulations to confront any attempt to damage the goals and threaten the integrieties of C.S. and our corporation.

The societies have awarded C.S. with the exclusive moral rights respectively Lanham (Trademark) rights and the copyrights for being creative, diligent, and hard-working, learning at least 5 if not 10 times more than what is the norm in informatics and computer sciences in addition to gaining all the other capabilities, skills, and competences, and also creating, presenting, and discussing our masterpieces.
Take a look back into the years 1999 and 2006, and recall what were the state of the art and the mind set, and then compare the situation of the past with what we did and changed with our totally beyond the ordinary works of art.
Now moving the goal posts is not a solution.

Furthermore, all those arguments, which we have heard so far in the last past about democratization, regulation, and so on are utter nonsense, as we directly said and explained all the time.
One example is the claim of some entities that there must be regulations for whatsoever reasons, but the same entities refuse to comply to the same regulations or even the already existing regulations (see again the list above).

Another example is given in the following interview, which also reflects the argument of at least one Chief Executive Officer (CEO) of an illegal Web Services (WS) and Cloud, Edge, and Fog Computing (CEDC) platform, and potentially of some oversmart politicians across the world.
We quote an interview of a Chief Executive Officer (CEO) of a chip manufacturer: "[...]
[Moderator:] [...] Now, [a company] makes chips, that basically play a massive role in the AI revolution. [...] Artificial Intelligence has not only made [a company] rich, it's sort of a global debate over regulation. And the chief executive [...] tells me different cultures will need to design their own guardrails.
[CEO:] In every single country and every single region, there is an awakening, government awakening, social awakening that the data of their culture, the data of their society, the data of their people should be refined, and processed, and turned into the digital intelligence of their own people. And so this is a sovereign AI movement, that is happening everywhere, every country should protect their own data, they should turn into digital intelligence and AI themselves and the ability to do that is fairly available today. We should go and enable ..., and democratize the capability to do that.
[Moderator:] Isn't that inherently contradictory to the idea of global standards, if you have everybody trying to do their own, controlling their own within the borders of their own country? It's not the most efficient way of doing it, even if it might be, or perhaps arguably, the most democratic.
[CEO:] We should have underlying technologies achieve standards as much as possible. However, intelligence cannot be standardized. Common sense of different people cannot be standardized. This region [of the U.S.America] feels differently and has a very different history than different regions around the world. And so we need to enable every region to create their own digital intelligence.
[Moderator:] But what it does give in doing that? If you think about the entire way, in which this whole digital transformation is taking place, it has always been based on a standardization. It looks the same everywhere. And now you're saying, when [so(?)] actually, really, democratization requires us to specialize it back again.
[CEO:] That's right, transistors should be standardized, Internet can be standardized, computing technology can be standardized, but intelligence should not be. And the reason for that is very simple: You want domain specific intelligence for healthcare. You want somebody to be a super intelligence for healthcare. That super intelligence for healtcare doesn't have to be a super intelligence for everything else but healthcare. You want a super intelligence for energy discovery, you want a super intelligence for logistics and transportation, and these intelligences really [ought to be(?)] created by the industries themselves, by the countries, that specialize in these industries. And what we need to do is enable them to do it, not to do it for them.
[Moderator:] We are in the midst of a U.S. political season, that promises to be extremely volatile, in my word. Do you worry that post the next election, however it [blends(?)] out, that the relationship with China worsens or at least the ability for you to do your business becomes more difficult [...] with China?
[CEO:] First of all, all American companies' and so our first job is to comply with the laws, comply with the policies. And within that don't overthink too much about that and focus on everything else. Focus on creating new technologies, enabling new industries, and solve new problems, open up new markets. In the meanwhile, just ... whatever geopolitical challenges there are between the United States and China, it's opening up enormous opportunities everywhere else as other countries realize that they have to invest in their own sovereign AI.
[Moderator:] What the Europeans [are really(?)] tremendously, I mean look at the Digital Privacy Act in the U.K., you look at what the EU has done at the EU level. It's quite extraordinary.
[CEO:] That's right. Every single country. This is happening all over, in every region all over the world. You haven't seen anything like that. And the reason for that is, because every country, every region, every culture needs to digitalize their own intelligence. You cannot [outsource(?)] that to somebody and you don't want that to be an industry standard."

Comment
We do net zero cursing.
The true goals of that company and other entities are so transparent by their acts to

and the arguments of that CEO and others persons, that for democratization and digital transformation one needs specialization and no standardization, are so ridiculous, as one can easily see by the questions of the moderator, and the answers of that CEO and others, and also our explanations and the common sense.
Among all the many other things, we have also already proven with the creations of our Evolutionary operating system (Evoos) and our Ontologic System (OS) that intelligence and common sense can be standardized in general and for different domains in particular, and our OS

Why should a country be retrograde, if we already have everything to make the next step and are making the next step?
And even if there exists an exception from the rule due to different cultures, different histories, different common senses, different feelings, different specializations, different competences, etc., then our SOPR is already here to do all related jobs as the only legal entity.

We also recall that "any construct like a national cloud, national Artificial Intelligence (AI), and all that other national nonsense will not change the fact that there is only one Ontologic System (OS) and this is our OS, and that our OS defines respectively rules what is in the legal scope of ... the Ontoverse (Ov) and what is not".
Therefore, entities are not allowed to modify our Evoos and our OS, but have to utilize the exclusive and mandatory infrastructures of our SOPR and our other Societies with their set of fundamental and essential

We also note that we saw these problems with

all the time when creating our Evoos and our OS and concluded that this will not work by taking the brute force approaches as now practiced and propagated by all bad actors, specifically without

and also

which have been discussed, but have not been completely revealed by us, obviously for very good reasons, and have not been completely understood by others, obviously for no plausible reasons, for example to significantly reduce the amount of computing power and electric power required and to allow the further realization of our Ontoverse (Ov) and New Reality (NR) with our Global Brain of the second generation (GB 2.0).

And the true reason, why we have our revolution is that C.S. created and every country, every region, every culture, every company, everybody wants to be part of our Ontoverse (Ov) and New Reality (NR), and enjoy the self-reflection, self-image, or self-portrait, and cybernetic and ontologic reflection, augmentation, and extension of C.S. inclusive our belief system with our usable computing, cybernetic, or ontologic aether or spirit or common sense or consciousness, our ghost in the machine, our concept of consciousness, our process of thinking, and our imagination of spirit, our Ontologic Holon (Onton) with our real and virtual respectively digital intelligence, our digital twin, and so on of C.S..
And we cannot see any reason why an entity does not want to be part of our Ov and NR, but instead take a path, which has already been shown to be unsustainable. In fact, it is an interconnected respectively globalized world, and therefore isolation and nationalization does not work anymore.

Even that alleged awakening has been artificially created by the same bad actors in governments, commissions, federal authorities and agencies, companies, and elsewhere, who are also responsible for the nonsense in relation to democratization, regulation, and any other total bull&#!+ of the rights and properties of C.S. and our corporation.
They did it before with Semantic (World Wide) Web, Multi-Agent System (MAS), Service-Oriented technologies (SOx), Free and Open Source Software (FOSS), smartphone, Linked Data (LD), Industry 4.0, cloud, crypto, Decentralized Web (DWeb), metaverse, and now bionics always only focused on our Evoos and our OS.

It makes no sense culturally, societally, artistically, politically, juridically, and economically. It is just cheap and dirty politics, but that has absolutely no constitutional and legal backing.

Eventually, all that blah blah blah has always been shown by the not so nice actors themselves, others, and us to be only fraud and even serious crime to infringe the rights and properties of C.S. and our coporation. They are just not able to tell the truth and act legally.
Obviously, neither democratization, expropriation, regulation, and any other total bull&#!+ nor action of an oversmart but only incompetent entity is required.

A government, that refuses to comply with the national and international rule-based law and order environment, face a penalty of the higher of the apportioned

• unpaid royalties for unauthorized performances and reproductions,
• obmitted referencing respectively citation with attribution, and
• thwarted, obstructed, blocked, and otherwise missed commercial business possibilities and follow-up opportunities,

by performing and reproducing our Evoos and our OS in whole or in part without authorization respectively allowance and license,

or even blacklisting.

Governments should just begin with all the others, specifically with putting the actual laws into practice, with breaking up the illegal monopolies, with democratizing the other monopolies, and so on. And when all of that is done, then we will invite everybody to discuss the rights and properties of C.S. and our corporation with us again. But please do not expect that this will happen in the next 2 decades at the earliest.

Not that way, ladies and gentlemen and all inbetween.
Nvidia, Intel, Arm, and Co. will sign, pay, and comply, specifically pay demage compensations and royalties, transfer all illegal materials, and even establish new companies as joint ventures respectively execute takeovers or mergers with our corporation as the leading shareholder, or they will file chapter 11, or governments will force them to do so in one way or another, because we do have the rights and properties and the others have nothing, which provides legal security and so on.
Welcome to the Ontoverse (Ov).

See also the note

14.February.2024

11:48 UTC+1
Chatbot based on MM, OM, ANNLM of Evoos is CM of Evoos

Ontologic Model (OM)
Artificial Neural Network (ANN) Language Model (LM) (ANNLM) (e.g. Large Language Model (LLM))
Cognitive Model (CM)
Evolutionary operating system (Evoos)

All with our MultiModal (MM), connectionist (neural) probabilistic language model respectively Artificial Neural Network (ANN) Language Model (LM) (ANNLM), Capability and Operational Model, generative and creative Bionics and Robotics, Chat Genetic Programning Technology, Conversational System (CS or ConS), etc. of our original and unique, sui generis and iconic masterpieces Evoos and OS with their

and also

as well as

Obviously, Artificial Neural Network (ANN), with Computational Linguistics (CL), Natural Language Processing (NLP) (Natural Language Parsing (NLP) and Natural Language Generation (NLG)) and Natural Language Understanding (NLU), and Language Modelling (LM) as part of Cognitive Modelling (CM), etc., is not enough by far.

The direct damage alone by one plagiarism and fake is above 100 billion U.S. Dollar. The indirect damage is already around 10 trillion U.S. Dollar.
The plagiarists should better not be proud of that.

15.February.2024

11:00, 11:20, and 12:40 UTC+1
If no sign, pay, comply, then no legal certainty

C.S. has the exclusive moral rights respectively Lanham (Trademark) rights (e.g. exploitation (e.g. commercialization (e.g. monetization))).
Eventually, the damages are at least the higher of the apportioned

by performing and reproducing our Evoos and our OS in whole or in part without authorization respectively allowance and license.
Our Society for Ontological Performance and Reproduction (SOPR) together with independent consulting agencies will analyse and determine the total damages and admission fees of a licensing partner on a individual base.
In the next step, our SOPR will take the result to determine the conditions for the payment of a damage compensation and the establishment of a new company as joint venture, as discussed in the past broadly, deeply, thoroughly, and elaborately.
As a rule of thumb, we substract 27% from the ratio of business shares, which comes out from an analysis of the value increased, and take this 27% as royalties With No Discounts Granted (WNDG) in case of a joint venture. Please note that actually no entity qualifies for more than 3 discounts and after a potential revision in the future for more than 2 discounts.
Special offers have been submitted for a limited period of time, but without set of specific due date.

An entity is not allowed to modify our Evoos and our OS, but has to comply with

and therefore has to utilize the exclusive and mandatory infrastructures of our SOPR and our other Societies with their set of fundamental and essential

We will review and, if necessary, revise every decision of an entity, specifically from Silicon Valley, Silicon Alley, and at other locations, that has been made without consent or authorization, and legal certainty in the legal scope of ... the Ontoverse (Ov), specifically if it violates the ToS of our SOPR.
We do have the exclusive the rights and we do control the properties of C.S. and our corporation.

13:26 UTC+1
OctoML blacklisted

We have demanded that so-called Cloud Service Providers (CPSs) stop the provision of connectivity, computing power, storage, and other technologies, goods, and services to those illegal start-ups and other bad actors, which in this case is Amazon Web Services (AWS).

13:27 UTC+1
Civit.ai blacklisted

Andreessen Horowitz (a16z) are also in deep legal trouble now due their continuted interference with, and also obstruction, underming, and harm of the exclusive moral rights respectively Lanham (Trademark) rights (e.g. exploitation (e.g. commercialization (e.g. monetization))).
Yes, of course, they have done and are still doing, which is not allowed, and we have them warned multiple times, which is allowed.

14:42 UTC+1
Comment of the Day

"Now we know what the Big Bang is.", [C.S., Today]

18:51, 19:31, and 19:53 UTC+1
DC and CC x.0 strategy does not work without OS

Data Center (DC)
Cloud Computing of the xth generation (CC x.0)

Software is hareder than Hardware.
Data center and what we call Cloud Computing of the first generation 1.0 (CC 1.0) and Cloud Computing of the secong generation (CC 2.0) only for better understanding are virtually basically only hardware and ordinary standard services, which means quantitative and price sensitive bulkware, and also access places of our Ontoverse (Ov) and New Reality (NR).
The interesting software are our Evoos, including our coherent Ontologic Model (OM), including our

• Large Language Model (LLM),
• Artificial Neural Network (ANN) MultiModal Model (MMM) (ANNMMM), including what is wrongly called
  • Large Multimodal Model (LMM),
  • MultiModal Large Language Model (MMLLM),

and all of our many MultiModal (MM) technologies (MMx), generative and creative Cybernetics, Bionics, Robotics, and Ontonics, foundations of virtualization, Service-Oriented technologies (SOx), and so on, and our OS with our OntoBot, including our Robotic Automation technologies (RAx), chatbot, what is wrongly called text robot, and all of our other OSComponents (OSC) with this and that, and so on.

And they all do need software and quality, which means the allowance and license and also the infrastructures of our SOPR.

Either each of the 2 groups sign together or we will talk with each of them alone about 90% + 10% or even more potentially 95% + 5% respectively the higher of the apportioned

by performing and reproducing our Evoos and our OS in whole or in part without authorization respectively allowance and license, and interfering with, and also obstructing, undermining, and harming the exclusive moral rights respectively Lanham (Trademark) rights of C.S and our corporation, as well as participating and even organizing conspiracies and plots against C.S. and our corporation.:)

See also the notes

and the other publications cited therein or/and publicized elsewhere on this website of OntomaX.

By the way:

16.February.2024

01:50 UTC+1
Ontonics Further steps

We have already planned since around 5 years to merge in constructive and advantageous ways the variants of our Evoos and our OS in the fields of

• Information Filtering (IF) System (IFS), including
  • Recommendation System or Recommender System (RecS),
• Search System (SS) or Search Engine (SE), and
• Question Answering (QA) System (QAS),

• Conceptual Graph (CG),
• Semantic Network (SN),
• Topic Map (TM),
• Graph-Based Knowledge Base (GBKB) or Knowledge Graph (KG),
• DataBase (DB) (e.g. triple store, product catalog),

• Deductive DB (DDB) (e.g. Prolog),
• ontology,
• etc.,

• Semantic Search Engine (SSE) System (SSES),

• Knowledge Management System (KMS),

• Multi-Agent System (MAS),

• (voice-based or speech controlled) virtual assistant, and
• Intelligent Personal Assistant (IPA),

• Chat Genetic Programming technologies (GPx),

• Speech Processing (SP)
  • speech recognition system and
  • speech synthesis system,

of the companies Microsoft and Alphabet (Google), and potentially other companies, that take our special offer.
This will make the other plagiarisms and fakes of our Evoos and our OntoBot with our coherent Ontologic Model (OM) and our generative and creative Cybernetics, Bionics, Robotics, and Ontonics, and also our OntoScope (OSc) and Ontoverse (Ov) obsolete.

In the subsequent step, we will ... do something. :)

In the following step, we will focus on the exclusive and mandatory infrastructures, the Main Contracts (MCs), and licensing partners of our SOPR and our other Societies. :)
This will make the other plagiarisms and fakes of our Evoos and our OS obsolete.
This will also make it obsolete that third parties have to fiddle around with our masterpiece and just utilize our subsystems and platforms.
This will also make it obsolete to continue with interfering with, and also obstructing, undermining, and harming the exclusive moral rights respectively Lanham (Trademark) rights of C.S. and our corporation, but will provide a very convincing argument to comply with the

01.06 and 13:11 UTC+1
Maybe time for SV, SA, et al to intevene at AI start-ups

Silicon Valley (SV)
Silicon Alley (SA)
at other locations (et al)
Artificial Intelligence (AI)

How we will go on, has been discussed. How this will happen in detail and under which conditions is now up to the decisions of the shareholders and managers of the companies Microsoft, Alphabet (Google), Amazon, Nvidia, Intel, Arm Holdings, and Co., and also the governments, and all other entities concerned.

14:49 and 15:01 UTC+1
SOPR reminds about video gaming framework

Our Society for Ontological Performance and Reproduction (SOPR) would like to give the reminder to all entities concerned to utilize the infrastructures of our SOPR and our other Societies with their set of fundamental and essential

for their endeveaours in the fields of simulation, education, problem solving, engineering, video gaming, social and societal network, entertainment, and so on.
See also the issue SOPR #327 of the 7th of June 2021 for the general architecture and organization, management and operation, and so on.

We would also like to give the recommendation to create, research and develop, and implement for our Ontoverse (Ov) with its eXtended Mixed Reality (XMR) or simply eXtended Reality (XR) and New Reality (NR), also wrongly called Metaverse by others and called Metaverse Multiverse by us for better understanding.
For sure, we will not leave our property to the bad actors with their open walled garden. :þ ©™

In this relation, our SOPR asks the creators of video games and consoles and to draft a framework for the collective monetization of their creations, and also products and services, specifically for the case that a user would like to get and play a bundle of games from different companies.

Alternatively, just utilize the related subsystems and platforms.

17.February.2024

19:56 UTC+1
Lego Fortnite is copyright infringement

Lego minifigures belong to our art style in relation to the gameplay or rule of the game, or genre or field of Massively Multiplayer Online Game (MMOG), including Massively Multiplayer Role-Playing Game (MMORPG).
And no, it does not matter which rights the company Lego has in relation to the minifigures, because it has no monopoly for everything in this case.
The only solution is that the company Lego does 3 actions immediately: Sign, pay, comply, which implies the utilization of the exclusive and mandatory infrastructures of our SOPR and our other Societies. :)
For sure, the legal situation is that clear and simple.

See the related messages, notes, explanations, clarifications, investigations, and claims, specifically

21:27 UTC+1
Amazon has already been invited multiple times

One original, one OS, one model, one rights and properties holder.

And for all other entities concerned, the

are already the common rule-based law and order environment and compromise.
And we are open for business, and also freedom of choice, innovation, and competiton pro bono publico==for the public good with our legal, innocent monopoly.

19.February.2024

16:13 and 27:29 UTC+1
These 'R' Us, still
Website revision, maybe

We looked at the connectionist (neural) probabilistic Language Model (LM) respectively Artificial Neural Network (ANN) Language Model (LM) (ANNLM), including what is wrongly called Large Language Model (LLM)) once again and

to exactly determine the course of the white, yellow, or red line.

We quote an online encyclopedia about the subject Generative artificial intelligence: "Generative artificial intelligence (generative AI, GenAI,[1] or GAI) is artificial intelligence capable of generating text, images or other data using generative models,[2] often in response to prompts.[3][4] Generative AI models learn the patterns and structure of their input training data and then generate new data that has similar characteristics.[5][6]
Improvements in transformer-based deep neural networks enabled an AI boom of generative AI systems in the early 2020s. These include large language model (LLM) chatbots [...], text-to-image artificial intelligence art systems [...], and text-to-video AI generators [...].

History
[...]
Since the founding of AI in the 1950s, artists and researchers have used artificial intelligence to create artistic works. By the early 1970s, Harold Cohen was creating and exhibiting generative AI works created by AARON, the computer program Cohen created to generate paintings.[26]
Markov chains have long been used to model natural languages since their development by Russian mathematician Andrey Markov in the early 20th century. Markov published his first paper on the topic in 1906,[27][28][29] and analyzed the pattern of vowels and consonants in the novel Eugeny Onegin using Markov chains. Once a Markov chain is learned on a text corpus, it can then be used as a probabilistic text generator.[30][31]
The field of machine learning often uses statistical models, including generative models, to model and predict data. Beginning in the late 2000s, the emergence of deep learning drove progress and research in image classification, speech recognition, natural language processing and other tasks. Neural networks in this era were typically trained as discriminative models, due to the difficulty of generative modeling.[32]
In 2014, advancements such as the variational autoencoder and generative adversarial network produced the first practical deep neural networks capable of learning generative models, as opposed to discriminative ones, for complex data such as images. These deep generative models were the first to output not only class labels for images but also entire images.
In 2017, the Transformer network enabled advancements in generative models compared to older Long-Short Term Memory models,[33] [...]"]

Comment
We always note the gap until our Evoos was presented in December 1999. Evoos is based on Genetic Programming (GP), which has as an essential functionality generative modelling to generate programs and all kinds of other things, which are selected for the next generation.

We also quote an online encyclopedia about the subject Large Language Model (LLM): "A large language model (LLM) is a language model notable for its ability to achieve general-purpose language generation and understanding. LLMs acquire these abilities by learning statistical relationships from text documents during a computationally intensive self-supervised and semi-supervised training process.[1] LLMs are artificial neural networks, the largest and most capable of which are built with a transformer-based architecture. Some recent implementations are based on other architectures, such as recurrent neural network variants and Mamba (a state space model).[2][3][4 [Mamba: Linear-Time Sequence Modeling with Selective State Spaces]]
LLMs can be used for text generation, a form of generative AI, by taking an input text and repeatedly predicting the next token or word.[5] [...] Larger sized models [...] however, can be prompt-engineered to achieve similar results.[6] They are thought to acquire knowledge about syntax, semantics and "ontology" inherent in human language corpora, but also inaccuracies and biases present in the corpora.[7] [...]"]

Comment
Thank you very much for the "syntax, semantics and "ontology"".
Obviously, the terms General Purpose Language Processing (GPLP) (General Purpose Language Parsing (GPLP) and General Purpose Language Generation (GPLG)) and General Purpose Language Understanding (GPLU) are directly connected with what we call Natural Multimodal Processing (NMP) and Natural Multimodal Understanding (NMU), and include what we also explained in the related Clarifications in relation to the other functionalities, and processing and understanding capabilities of our Evoos and our OS.

Also note that we have intergrated the

which means our coherent Ontologic Model (OM) of our Evoos and our OS can do Mixture of Experts (MoE) Model (MoEM) besides Foundational Model (FM) (Foundation Model (FM)), and also all the (other) modular, hybrid, and unified things.

We also would like to mention our Structured Petri net-Entity-Relationship Modeling™ and Structured Ontology Modeling™ with at least 4 parameters or dimensions (Δ time, x dimension, y dimension, z dimension). Somehow, this suggests something like the Structured State Space Sequence (S4) Model (S4M).

Indeed, a lot of crazy stuff is possible, which will make the head spin.

So far, no prior art has been found in relation to the fields included in our

• Foundational Model (FM),
• Capability and Operational Model (COM) (also compare with for example Arrow system and TUNES OS), and
• Language Model (LM),
• Cognitive Model (CM),
• MultiModal Language Model (MMLM), including
  • MultiModal General Purpose Language Model (MMGPLM), including what is wrongly called
    • MultiModal Large Language Model (MMLLM),
• Artificial Neural Network General Purpose Model (ANNGPM), including
  • Foundation Model (FM),
  • General Purpose Language Model (GPLM), including what is wrongly called
    • Large Language Model (LLM),
  • Artificial Neural Network MultiModal Model (ANNMMM), including what is wrongly called
    • MultiModal Large Language Model (MMLLM),
  • etc.,
• etc.,

and the fields such as

• Text-to-other modalities (T2x) engines and generators,

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

which are all included in our Evolutionary operating system (Evoos) and Ontologic System (OS).

In this context of Language Model (LM), the same holds for the itnegrations with the fields of

• Model-Based Autonomous System (MBAS) and Immobile Robotic System (ImRS or Immobot),

• Intelligent Agent System (IAS),
• Multi-Agent System (MAS),
• Cognitive Agent System (CAS),

• Computer-Aided Design (CAD),
• Computer-Aided Engineering (CAE),
• Computer-Aided Software Engineering (CASE)
• etc.,

See also for example the messages, notes, explanations, clarifications, investigations, and claims

In this relation, we also have to recall once again that from a holistic view a mesh of interdependencies allows no legal loopholes by copying respectively what we call the segmentation or separation trick, which is a fraud method of shaving off, splitting off, or chipping off single elements, components, integrations, smaller compilations, etc..

We will update our website, where we might have gone too far with our explanations and claims in relation to the field of Computational Linguistics (CL), including Language Modelling (LM).

21.February.2024

17:42 UTC+1
SOPR extends and refines set of legal clauses

In addition to the prohibition of the mimicking of C.S. and our corporation, including our SOPR, our SOPR also added the following clauses to the Articles of Association (AoA) and the Terms of Service (ToS):

if leaving a joint venture in the legal scope of the original and unique ArtWorks (AWs) and futher Intellectual Properties (IPs) included in the oeuvre of C.S., specifically in the legal scope of ... the Ontoverse (Ov).

19:06 UTC+1
KG with ANNLM is copyright infringement

Graph-Based Knowledge Base (GBKB) or Knowledge Graph (KG)
Artificial Neural Network (ANN) Language Model (LM) (ANNLM) (e.g. Large Language Model (LLM))

The question is irrelevant, if the integration of the fields of KG and ANNLM (e.g. LLM) (e.g. Forming Global Representations with Extended backPropagation (FGREP) 2.0 and DIStributed PARaphraser (DISPAR) 2.0) is used for

because of our copyright in relation to our Evoos and our OS.

We have shown the

which show that our Evoos and our OS have been taken as sources of inspirations and blueprints without authorization, but with the intention and goal to

of C.S. and our corporation,

• true origin of the original and unique ArtWorks (AWs) and futher Intellectual Properties (IPs) included in the oeuvre of C.S., and also
• existence of C.S. and our corporation, and

The same holds for anything related to our

aka. Ontoverse (Ov) and New Reality (NR).

See also the notes

We demand once again the companies Meta (Facebook) and Alphabet (Google) as well as all other entities concerned to remove illegal Free and Open Source Software (FOSS) immediately, specifically all of their illegal LLMs and integrations of them with technologies, goods, and services on the basis of our Evoos Architecture (EosA) and our OS Architecture (OSA).

22.February.2024

01:22 UTC+1
Success story continues and no end in sight

Industry 6.0 'R' Us. Who else?

19:41 and 23:45 UTC+1
Ontonics Further steps

Our Hightech Office Ontonics is already analyzing the key figures of the company Nvidia in more detail, specifically the revenue generated in the fields of

in general and their connections with our Evolutionary operating system (Evoos) and Ontologic System (OS), to determine if we can already take over 51% or more of its voting shares as the damage compensations, which are the higher of the apportioned

by performing and reproducing our Evoos and our OS in whole or in part without authorization respectively allowance and license, and interfering with, and also obstructing, undermining, and harming the exclusive moral rights respectively Lanham (Trademark) rights of C.S and our corporation, as well as participating and even organizing conspiracies and plots against C.S. and our corporation.
Obviously, it is not only about selling HardWare (HW).

We quote a first report: "Sales from the company's core data center business grew 409% year-over-year to a record $18.4 billion in the fourth quarter, thanks to partnerships with infrastructure giants like Google, Amazon and Cisco."

Comment
So, so, the exclusive and mandatory infrastructures of our SOPR and its partnerships with the other already convicted companies. All entities concerned do know about what we are talking here.

We quote a second report: "Its data centre business contributed the vast majority of its revenues in the most recent quarter after growing more than than five-fold over the last year."

Comment
Bingo!!!
We already know that its core data center business is directly connected with our Evoos and our OS, but now it is shown court-proof, as is the case with several other activities of Nvidia alone and in collaboration with other entities.

Once again, all these facilities require the allowance and license for the performance and reproduction of certain parts of our OS, which they do not have. And without this worldwide legal requirement no data center is allowed to operate with said parts of our OS in the legal scope of ... the Ontoverse (Ov).

How our overall revolution with our many revolutions continues, is still decided by us and no other entity, as required by the

which are already the common rule-based law and order environment and compromise.

By the way:

23.February.2024

09:10 and 18:46 UTC+1
No problems with Huawei and Co. in Asian

The

do apply worldwide and no further discussion and negotiation are necessary.

Of course, what is called Cloud Computing of the next generation (CC x.0) goes to our SOPR and everything else of the exclusive and mandatory infrastructures of our SOPR and our other Societies. And the other essential parts of our Evolutionary operating system (Evoos) and Ontologic System (OS) with our

• Foundational Model (FM) (Foundation Model (FM)),
• Capability and Operational Model (COM),
• Modular Model (MM or ModM),
• Multimodal Model (MM or MulM),
• Language Model (LM),
• Conversation Model (CM or ConM),
• Cognitive Model (CM or CogM),
• MultiModal Language Model (MMLM), including
  • MultiModal General Purpose Language Model (MMGPLM), including what is wrongly called
    • MultiModal Large Language Model (MMLLM),
• Artificial Neural Network General Purpose Model (ANNGPM), including
  • Foundation Model (FM),
  • General Purpose Language Model (GPLM), including what is wrongly called
    • Large Language Model (LLM),
  • Artificial Neural Network MultiModal Model (ANNMMM), including what is wrongly called
    • MultiModal Large Language Model (MMLLM),
  • etc.,
• etc.,

• Text-to-other modalities respectively media (T2x) engines and generators,

and our fields based on it such as

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

which are all included in our Evolutionary operating system (Evoos) and our Ontologic System (OS) remain our, too, in the P.R.China, India, and other Asian countries. :)

One more reason to collaborate with us or even better to be part of us.

08:48, 19:43, 21:50, 22:29, and 23:14 UTC+1
SOPR adjusted ratios of special offer option

In relation to the establishment of new companies as joint ventures respectively restitution as executions of company takeovers or mergers, our Society for Ontological Performance and Reproduction (SOPR) adjusted the ratio of business shares.
The reasons are once again new insights about activities in the past, but also a lower assessment of the company values, and other developments.

That the Large Language Models (LLMs) are copyright infringements, exclusive the few ones, which prove the rule (e.g. true chatbots without Graph-Based Knowledge Base (GBKB) or Knowledge Graph (KG) (see also the note KG with ANNLM is copyright infringement of the 21st of February 2024), coherent Ontologic Model, Capability and Operational Model (COM), etc. (see also the note These 'R' Us, still of the 19th of February 2024), has been proven by us multiple times.
Recently, the scam with what is wrongly called transformer, perceiver, Foundational Model (FM) (Foundation Model (FM)), Large Language Model (LLM), and generative Artificial Intelligence (genAI), and all related attempts to jump the line by brute force and abuse of power has been busted and is over, because it becomes more and more obvious that they are AI crap, which in contrast to our Evoos and our OS with their architectures, basic properties, and components has foundational deficits due to the

which again can only be cured and are already being cured by even more infringments of the rights and properties of C.S. and our corporation.
Eventually, LLM and genAI are part of the next scam, the AI scam, after the Java scam, service-oriented scam, smartphone scam, cloud scam, Free and Open Source Software (FOSS) scam, and crypto scam, always the same fraud scheme, which also proves our explanations and claims. Most of the hype around LLM and genAI has been created by the usual blah blah blah. See also the note ChatGPT and Co. are AI crap, aka. NonsenseBots of the of the 27th of May 2023.
Furthermore, the dependency on our Evoos and our OS by other entities has also been proven before and also becomes more and more obvious.

Alternatively, common sense and compromise, which are the laws being effective in general.

And if the special offer should be really an out-of-court agreement, can be questioned at least as long nothing is fixed and signed on paper and paid into our pockets.

We are also back at the point of the issue SOPR # of the 4th of January 2023, because it makes no sense anymore to open our OS and allow and license the performance and reproduction of certain parts of our OS.
The decision is that we do not sell.
The deal was that our SOPR manages and operates our Ontoverse (Ov) and New Reality (NR).
The fact is that we created masterpieces, designed architectures, and solved problems, which others did not know at all, did not wanted to solve, or were not able to solve, we presented, we explained, we started several discussions and revolutions, we managed a development, transformation, transition, etc., we even opened as compromise, we showed responsibilty, we drafted a set of legal documents, so that other companies can avoid insolvency, economics can go on, pension, wealth, and other funds do not collapse, and a lot more, while all others were permanently spying, marketing, lobbying, lying, betraying, stealing, conducting corruptions, conspiracies and plots, and other serious criminal actions, taking us on a ride, psychoterrorizing us, and so on alone and in collaboration with others. Doubtlessly, our arts and works are quite perfect, or otherwise we would not have such bad actions and reactions.
And now we have a giant heap of crap, which we wanted to avoid with the creation of our OS, including several companies, or better said illegal monopolies of the Information and Communication Technology (ICT) industrial sector each with a market capitalization of more than 1 trillion U.S. Dollar increased by copying

and also our art assets of several genres, including

and also

as well as

and also our infrastructures with their set of fundamental and essential

(see the issue SOPR #327 of the 7th of June 2021 for the general architecture and organization, management and operation, and so on) without authorization, and also by frustrating our momenta, thwarting, obstructing, blocking, and otherwise missing commercial business possibilities and follow-up opportunities, and trading (e.g. selling and purchasing) the related parts of our corporation at the stock markets and even giving them away as illegal Free and Open Source Software (FOSS), but also a destroyed provenance, history, democracy, rule-based law and order, culture, and civilization.

Specifically, the core data center business of a company

Also note that in relation with the fields of SoftBionics (SB) (e.g. AI, ML, CI, ANN, NLP, etc.)

do exist.

We will not pay for that mess. Never.
We get all of the rights and properties back. Now.

Our Society for Ontological Performance and Reproduction (SOPR) protects the

and therefore democratizes all processors, which are utilized for

in the legal scope of ... Ontoverse (Ov), and demands the exclusive chip production, including the custom-made chips by the fabs, for the one and only sovereign intelligence of ... the Ontoverse (Ov), also known as OntoLand, and for the ordinary, reasonable street price, which has been decided by us with this move and not by the stock markets and other markets, and can be offset with the damage compensations.

All illegal facilities, technologies, goods, and services will not be part of our Ontoverse (Ov) and New Reality (NR). Illegal means that a causal link with that fraud and crime exists from our point of view (see the section before).
Owners and operators get the option to sell their illegal facilities, technologies, goods, and services for the cost price less wear and tear on value, which will be offset with the damage compensations.

24.February.2024

10:02, 19:23, and 20:23 UTC+1
SOPR considering no openess again

We already took action with the issue SOPR # of the 4th of January 2023.
The new regulation demands that an entity, that is interested in the performance and reproduction of certain parts of our Evolutionary operating system (Evoos) and our Ontologic System (OS) as a user, customer, and licensee, has to establish for each single one of Ontologic Applications and Ontologic Services (OAOS) representing a single

a new company as a joint venture together with our corporation and use the exclusive

• facilities (e.g. buildings, data centers, exchange points or hubs, and communication channels),
• technologies (e.g. (sub)systems, platforms, and backbones, core networks, or fabrics),
• goods (e.g. applications, devices, robots, and vehicles), and
• services (e.g. as a Service (aaS) business, capability, and operational models (e.g. (core) Infrastructure as a Service (IaaS), (utility) Technology as a Service (TaaS), (utility) Platform as a Service (PaaS), Service as a Service (SaaS), Data as a Service (DaaS), Trust as a Service (TaaS), SoftBionics as a Service (SBaaS), etc.)

(see the issue SOPR #327 of the 7th of June 2021 for the general architecture and organization, management and operation, and so on), and also

The established joint venture gets a grace period of 3 years to beome profitable. If it does not generate a profit, then it gets a last chance period of 3 years. If it still does not generate a profit after 6 years, then it will be terminated.

This is how our legal, innocent monopoly guarantees and protects freedom of choice, innovation, and competition pro bono publico==for the public good.

See also for example the notes

and the other publications cited therein.

But to become eligible for the establishment of such a joint venture an entity at first has to fulfill all demands or preconditions, prerequisites, and requirements, specifically

• triple damage compensations induced,
• profits generated, or
• value (e.g. share price, market capitalization) increased (see also the note SOPR refined demands of the 3rd of January 2024)

See for example the note SOPR has reviewed discounts of the 26th of May 2023 for a summary.

In this context, our Society for Ontological Performance and Reproduction (SOPR)

• BasicOAOS 1 up to 2 OAOS respectively ,
• MidOAOS 3 up to 5 OAOS, and
• SuperOAOS 6 up to 15 OAOS,

and

• open our OS with
  • no compromise and no win-win on the one hand, but
  • the clear white, yellow, or red line on the other hand,

• grant an entity a discount, or
• do any other favour,

so that we

• BasicOAOS 18.75%,
• MidOAOS 23.75%, and
• SuperOAOS 28.75%.

Some non-binding examples for the ratios of company shares, including share capital or capital stocks, including voting and prefered shares, or common and preferred stocks estimated by us:

By the way:

In fact, what they are selling is not, what they did in the past and what they will do in the future, but what we are realizing with our Evoos and our OS, and also our momentum and our future, as proven by the substantial and significant evidences, which

They want to get the control over our rights and properties in this way as well. And the laws, and the courts, and the computers say: No!

25.February.2024

05:43 UTC+1
Comment of the Day

© Little Britain

Yeah but, no but, yeah but, no but, yeah but, no but also see the

06:39 UTC+1
SOPR considering local licensing only

We have already discussed the matter in the past.
The demand for various securities and sovereignties requires local control of territory, cyberspace, and intelligence.
Therefore, it is only consequent to allow and license an Ontologic Applications and Ontologic Services (OAOS) of an entity only in the scope of its local country or union of states. For sure, this is restricted to the country or union of states with its headquarters.
Is not it, Chief Executive Officer (CEO) of Nvidia?

Luckily, our Society for Ontological Performance and Reproduction (SOPR) is present, wherever a demand exists to provide the exclusive and mandatory infrastructures with their set of foundational and essential facilities (e.g. data centers), technologies (e.g. AI superchips and AI supercomputers), goods , and services (e.g. as a Service (aaS) business, capability, and operational models (e.g. Infrastructure as a Service (IaaS), Platform aaS (PaaS), SoftBionics aaS (SBaaS), etc.)), and also worldwide standards, specifically for our revolution igniting our era of accelerated computing, and generative and creative Bionics with our one and only OS.

21:12 and 26:16 UTC+1
Microsoft 90% + 10%

A short excerpt form only 1 larger graphic and 4 smaller graphics already proves the infringement of the copyright and the other rights and properties of C.S. and our corporation.
Business Applications Solutions Ecosystem (BASE),

We could easily go on with listing such identical matches and further evidences for hours in case of Microsoft, but also in case of all the others, kicking away all criticisms and doubts.
It is called copying a compilation, integration, architecture, and so on without authorization. And the claim of a CEO that our works would be her, his, or their vision is called willful appropriation, deception of the public, obmission of mandatory reporting, manipulation of the financial markets, and so on.
And the related legal issues are called infringment of the exclusive moral rights, copyrights, and so on.
And we have even not talked about our Ontologic Model (OM), generative and creative Bionics, OntoBot, Global Brain 2.0, Ontoverse, and so on on the one hand and all the other legal issues on the other hand.

The situation is the same with all other so-called Cloud, Edge, and Fog Computing (CEFC) platforms.

Oh, yes, for sure, we will meet somewhere in the ranges estimated by us (see the notes SOPR refined demands of the 3rd of January 2024 and SOPR considering no openess again of the 24th of February 2024 (yesterday)). Whether this will happen as an out-of-court agreement or an in-court judgement is their choice. :)
In this context, we are very sure that we get a temporary injunction from the courts even without hearing of Microsoft at least in the F.R.Germany. If judges read the 40th point with the next exact match, then they will be sure how to handle the case. As we always say, it is a mere formality.
And then the avalanche is triggered and will even faster bomb down the slope worldwide than the crypto crap and the AI crap, specifically the OpenAI, and Nvidia scams.

We get the ratio of company shares of 90% + 10% as the result of 2 general ways of assessment, as discussed in the note SOPR considering assessment methods of today.
Eventually, Microsoft is worth only around 330 billion U.S. Dollar, but not 3 trillion U.S. Dollar. This holds true for a part of our corporation.
We are fair, as usual. But as we said in the last past, we will not waive the control over 2.7 trillion U.S. Dollar and its leverage, because we do not have any reason and any cause to do such an utter nonsense, specifically continuing with feeding a troll and growing an illegal monopoly.

21:12 and 26:16 UTC+1
SOPR considering assessment methods

The ratio of company shares can be the result of 2 general ways of examination and assessment:
One result is based on the determination of the higher of the apportioned

by performing and reproducing our Evoos and our OS in whole or in part without authorization respectively allowance and license, and interfering with, and also obstructing, undermining, and harming the exclusive moral rights respectively Lanham (Trademark) rights of C.S and our corporation, as well as participating and even organizing conspiracies and plots against C.S. and our corporation.

The other result is based on our creation of somekind of an Abstraction-Filtration-Comparison (AFC) test or adoption of the AFC test to separate and eliminate the materials, which

by taking the following steps:

The rest is considered the truly relevant materials, assets, and intellectual properties of the other joint venture partner.

27.February.2024

00:00 UTC+1
DCos, CnC, aaSx, SDN, SD-WAN, ON, OW, OV, etc. no license

Data Center operating system (DCos)
Cloud-native Computing (CnC)
as a Service (aaS) technologies (aaSx)
Software-Defined Network (SDN)
Software-Defined Wide Area Network (SD-WAN)
Ontologic Net (ON)
Ontologic Web (OW)
Ontologic uniVerse (OV)

All the related terms are based on or merely other terms for our foundations and fields of

• model-reflective system,
• ontology,
• (model-)reflective, actor-based (concurrent and lock-free or non-blocking) Distributed operating system (Dos) (e.g. TUNES OS and Aperion (Apertos (Muse))), and
• Virtual Machine (VM), and also
• Model-Based Autonomous System (MBAS) or Immobile Robotic System (ImRS or Immobot) and Cyber-Physical System (CPS),
• Artificial Life (AL), including
  • Multi-Agent System (MAS), including
    • Holonic Agent System (HAS),
• Neural Network (NN),
• Associative Memory (AM),
• BlackBoard System (BBS) (central space of a Multi-Agent System (MAS)), as well as
• Artificial Intelligence (AI),
• Machine Learning (ML),
• Artificial Neural Network (ANN),
• Soft Computing of the first generation (SC of SoftC 1.0) (Fuzzy Logic (FL), Artificial Neural Network (ANN), Probabilistic Reasoning (PR) (e.g. Bayesian Network or Belief Network (BN), Genetic Algorithm (GA), parts of learning theory, and chaotic system),
• Soft Computing of the second generation (SC of SoftC 2.0) (Multi-Valued Logic (MVL), Artificial Neural Network (ANN), Probabilistic Model (PM or ProM), and Evolutionary Computing (EC)),
• Evolutionary Computing (EC) (Genetic Algorithm (GA), Genetic Programming (GP), etc.),
• Global Brain (GB),
• MAS agency or Agent Society (AS),
• and so on,

which were created as part of the self-reflection, self-image, or self-portrait, and cybernetic and ontologic reflection, augmentation, and extension of C.S. with our Evoos with its Evoos Architecture (EosA) and belong to our Ontologic System with its Ontologic System Architecture (OSA) and Ontoverse (Ov) and New Reality (NR), including

• Ontologic Net (ON)
• Ontologic Web (OW)
• Ontologic uniVerse (OV).

Therefore, here is already the white, yellow, or red line, and thus copyright infringements, conspiracies and plots, market manipulations, and so on.

All entities concerned are also aware about the exclusive and mandatory infrastructures of our Society for Ontological Performance and Reproduction (SOPR) and our other Societies with their set of fundamental and essential

• facilities (e.g. buildings, data centers, exchange points or hubs, and communication channels),
• technologies (e.g. (sub)systems, platforms, and backbones, core networks, or fabrics),
• goods (e.g. applications, devices, robots, and vehicles), and
• services (e.g. as a Service (aaS) business, capability, and operational models (e.g. (core) Infrastructure as a Service (IaaS), (utility) Technology as a Service (TaaS), (utility) Platform as a Service (PaaS), (utility) Backend as a Services (BaaS), Service as a Service (SaaS), Data as a Service (DaaS), Trust as a Service (TaaS), SoftBionics as a Service (SBaaS), etc.).

For sure, all cloud delivery technologies (e.g. models) respectively as a Service (aaS) technologies (aaSx), including for example (some items might be old, outdated, substituted, or new items, but we start here for historical and legal reasons)

• Rackspace (1998) (managed hosting of applications)
• Amazon Web Services Amazon Simple Queue Service (SQS), Elastic Compute Cloud (EC2) (2006) (virtual private server or virtual dedicated server hosting run by user using web service)
• IBM Softlayer (dedicated server, managed hosting, bare metal compute, and only years later cloud computing provider) (2005) acquisition (2013), acquisition of The Planet Internet Services dedicated server, SoftLayer's biggest competitor (2010), acquisition of Softlayer Bluemix, IBM Cloud (2013 and 2018)
• Citrix Systems VMOps (2008) Cloud.com (2010) Apache CloudStack (2010)
• Rackspace and National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) Openstack (2010)
• DigitalOcean Holdings (2011)
• Broadcom VMWare (1999), vSphere, Hybrid Cloud Extension (HCS), Cloud Foundation Software-Defined Data Center (SDDC), Cloud on AWS (2016)
• Google Compute Engine (2012)
• Microsoft Azure Virtual Machines (2015)
• Cisco Meraki (wireless mesh router, web-hosted network and Information Technology (IT) management) (2006) acquisition (2012), Viptela (SD-WAN) acquisition (2017)
• etc.,

• Red Hat Gluster (GNU and cluster) Network-Attached Storage (NAS) respectively Distributed FileSystem (DFS) (2005) NAS Virtual Appliances for VMware (Cloud) on Amazon Web Services (2011), acquisition of Gluster (2011)
• Amazon Web Services Simple Storage Service (S3) (object storage through a web service interface) (2006)
• Dropbox (2007)
• Microsoft OneDrive (2007), Azure Blob Storage
• Google Cloud Storage (RESTful file storage web service) (2010)
• OwnCloud (2010)
• Zadara (2011)
• Apple iCloud (2011)
• Google Drive (2012)
• Cozy.io (2015)
• etc.

• Amazon Web Services (AWS) vision of Amazon infrastructure "was completely standardized, completely automated, and relied extensively on web services for things like storage" (2003), collection of APIs and tools to access the Amazon.com catalog (2004), private precursor to AWS (cloud computing web services) S3, SQS, EC2 (2006) (see above to see what was all based on web services based on the Hypertext Transfer Protocol (HTTP)), EC2 Container Service (2014), Elastic File System (EFS) (2015), API Gateway (2015), Glue (event-driven, serverless computing platform) (2017), Elastic Kubernetes Service (EKS) (2018)
• Rackspace Mosso (web hosting on Linux, Apache, MySQL, PHP/Perl/Python (LAMP) and Internet Information Services (IIS) infrastructure) (2006)
• Heroku (2007) (said to be one of the first cloud platforms)
• Google App Engine (serverless computing model) (2008), Cloud Platform (2008), Cloud SQL (2011)
• Broadcom VMware, Pivotal Sotfware (EMC, VMware, and General Electric), Project B29 Cloud Foundry (2009 and 2011) (application development lifecycle and multilingual multi-cloud app runtime) and Cloud Foundry Foundation Cloud Foundry (2015), Bosh (2010), Pivotal Container Service with Kubernetes (PKS) (2017)
• Microsoft Azure (2010)
• GigaSpaces Technologies (distributed computing for transaction processing) (2000), Cloudify (2012)

• dotCloud, Central Intelligence Agency (CIA)→In-Q-Tel Docker (set of PaaS products for software application deployment automation) (2008) , Docker (2010, 2011)
• IBM Bluemix, IBM Cloud (2013 and 2018) (see above to see what was all), Kubernetes support as IBM Bluemix Container Service (2017)
• cloudControl (2009), dotCloud (2014)
• Google Container Engine (2014) Kubernetes Engine (GKE) (cluster management, container runtime, software application deployment, scaling, and management automation) (2014) Cloud Native Computing Foundation (CNCF) (2015)
• Mesosphere University Berkeley Mesos (2009)
• Microsoft Azure Container Service (see also Docker and Kubernetes), Azure Kubernetes Service
• IBM Red Hat acquisition of Makara (2010) Openshift Origin (2010), OKD, Enterprise, Container Platform
• OpenPaaS Suite

• Salesforce Platform
• SAP HANA Cloud (2012 and 2013), NetWeaver Cloud (2012), Cloud Platform (2017), Business Technology Platform (2021)
• etc.

• Microsoft SQL Azure, Azure Cosmos DB
• Goolge Cloud Datastore, Analytics
• Amazon DynamoDB, Redshift (PostgreSQL)
• Oracle Data Cloud, NoSQL Database Cloud Service (2011)
• CouchDB Relax
• Cockroach DB
• Casandra
• etc.

• Amazon Web Services Lambda (2014)
• Google Cloud Functions (2016)
• Microsoft Azure Functions
• Apache OpenWhisk
• etc.

and

• Microsoft Office 365, Teams, Dynamics
• Google G Suite
• Salesforce (1999) Slack (2013) acquisition (2020)
• Cisco VeloCloud SD-WAN Cloud OnRamp (2016)
• Zendesk (2007)
• SugarCRM (web-hosted Customer Relationship Management (CRM), web application) (2004)
• Oracle NetLedger (web-hosted accounting software, web application) (1998) NetSuite (web-hosted Enterprise Resource Planning (ERP), Customer Relationship Management (CRM), and Electronic Commerce (EC)) (2003) acquisition (2016)
• Acquia (2007)
• etc.

are affected with the exclusion of pure Internet Services (IS) and pure Web Services (WS) (e.g. web hosting, and virtual private server or virtual dedicated server hosting) as of the years 2000 to 2002 respectively

and some foundations of

though certain IaaS, STaaS, FaaS, and SaaS provided as WS still have to be provided as Ontologic Applications and Ontologic Services (OAOS) or as Main Contractor (MC) (see also for example the note SOPR considering no openess again of the 24th of February 2024).
But this is no surprise, because

We will not ask them for allowance and leave it to them, if this will happen as an out-of-court agreement or in-court judegment.
We will not discuss the rights and properties of C.S. and our corporation anymore out-of-court, but only how the transition (e.g. payment of damages, transfer of illegal materials, etc.) will take place.

Since the year 1998, they did not know what to do and since then they are trying to understand and steal our Evoos and our OS. Correspondingly, one can also easily see, when what we call Cloud Computing of the second generation (CC 2.0) only for better understanding begins and ends and when what we call Cloud Computing of the third generation (CC 3.0) only for better understanding begins.
See the note

01:00, 23:11, and 24:00 UTC+1
SOPR deciding about conspiracies and plots

Our fans and readers already do know very well that so far we do have sufficient and significant court-proof evidences about the collaborations, mildly said, of for example the following companies:

• member companies of the Cloud Native Computing Foundation (CNCF) (2015)

Authors of Free and Open Source Software (FOSS) projects concerned and affected will be forced to

2 graphics, which are showing

are all we need to show that the original and unique ArtWorks (AWs) and further Intellectual Properties (IPs) included in the oeuvre of C.S. and the performances and achievements of our corporation were taken as sources of inspiration and blueprints, which provides the required causal link with our Evoos and our OS. And we have already begun drawing with them several years ago.

And no,

• no scène à faire==scene to be made or scene that must be done respectively obligatory scene or scene mandated by or customary to the genre, and
• no merger,

but original and unique, personal, scientifically fictitious, unforeseeable and unexpected, copyrighted, prohibited for fair use, and already iconic, sui generis

and therefore exclusive and mandatory infrastructures of our SOPR and our other Societies with their set of foundational and essential facilities, technologies, goods, and services.

We are very sure that the consense of the vast majority worldwide is that we will not discuss, revise, redefine, or even abandon our constitutions, basic rights, freedoms, and rule-based law and order environments, just because a bunch of some corrupt politicians, and serious criminal government employees, civil servants, founders, shareholders, managers, lobbyists, spin doctors, dirty fellowers, self-exposers, and other scoundrels do not get what they want and instead organize and conduct conspiracies and plots, and other serious criminal actions, and gatecrash our culture, civil order, and harmony and smash them against the wall with all their might.
Computer says "No".

We never come with empty hands to a party. :)

04:33 UTC+1
Social media platforms are right

The social network providers are right, when arguing, that they hold the right to moderate their platforms, like a publisher of a newspaper or magazine, or a radio or television broadcaster. Media is media independent of media.

The U.S.American supreme court is right to demand more informations, specifically to understand the subject matter much better. But we do not think that this will change their judgement regarding the rights of the social media.

Howsoever, governments have the option to establish their own platforms and hook them into our Social and Societal System (S³) of the exclusive and mandatory infrastructures of our SOPR and execute their activities as they think is right.
Our SOPR even provides a societal platform for Ontologic Applications and Ontologic Services (OAOS), which are required for the other subsystems and platforms, such as for example government, governance, education, and all other federal activities.

But this provides the social network providers no carte blanch, blanket power, or jester's license, because the laws regulating data security and privacy, child protection, etc. are effective as well.

11:21 UTC+1
Brain Technologies blacklisted

There can only be one and our Ontologic System (OS) with its Ontologic roBot (OntoBot) and Ontoscope (Os) is the original and defines respectively rules what is in the legal scope of ... the Ontoverse (Ov) and what is not.

By the way:

28.February.2024

06:02, 11:00, and 20:10 UTC+1
% + %, % OAOS, % HW

The discussions, reasonings, terms and conditions, and other relevant matters have been publicized.

See also the many lists of what is included in our Evoos and our OS, and the resulting dependencies.
They all can do nothing else anymore than permanently infringing the rights and properties of C.S. and our corporation, as one can see with our Quantum Ledger™, coherent Ontologic Model (OM), including fundation model and foundational model, MultiModality (MM), and so on.

For example, everybody in the business does know that the era of Web Services (WS) based on the Hypertext Transfer Protocol (HTTP) of the Interconnected network (Internet) and REpresentational State Transfer (REST) of the World Wide Web (WWW) is over and the era of the Distributed operating system (Dos) and our

has begun. See also the Clarification Cloud 3.0 'R' Us #2 Just more 'R' Us of today below.
Therefore, it is no surprise at all that we got a signal from 1 company in relation with 2 companies.

But for the serious of the matter we would like recall the most important ones in case of the establishment of a new company as joint venture:

then we do so as well.
Otherwise, it remains aligned to the higher of the apportioned profits generated illegally or value (e.g. share price, market capitalization) increased illegally or both.
* only applies in case of an ordinary copyright infringement and reconstitution, restoration, and restitution procedure

So we list once again some non-binding examples for the ratios of company shares estimated by us:

The next estimations will be for certain companies of our friends in the U.K. and the European Union (EU), followed by our friends in the Republic of India and the P.R.China.

20:10 UTC+1
Clarification Cloud 3.0 'R' Us #2 Just more 'R' Us
maybe Website revision

The era of Web Services (WS) based on the Hypertext Transfer Protocol (HTTP) of the Interconnected network (Internet) and REpresentational State Transfer (REST) of the World Wide Web (WWW) is over and the era of the Distributed operating system (Dos) and our

has begun as can be easily seen with for example the subfields of the fields of operating system (os) and Service-Oriented technologies (SOx), and what is wrongly called Cloud-native technologies (Cnx), including Cloud-native Computing and Networking (CnCN) or simply Cloud-native Computing (CnC) (see also the projects and products of the fraudulent and even serious criminal Cloud Native Computing Foundation (CNCF)), including

• BlackBoard System (BBS) (e.g. System of Loosely Coupled Applications and Services (SLCAS), Tuple Space System (TSS) (e.g. JavaSpaces, and MUltiple Language/Target Integration PLATform FOR Modules (Multiplatform) integration platform respectively distributed multi-blackboard platform for multimodal dialog systems with ontology-based messaging), Linda-like System (LlS) (e.g. CHemical Abstract Machine (CHAM)), etc.),
• Dos (e.g. Ultra Large Distributed System (ULDS) respectively Ultra-Large scale, Massively Distributed operating system (ULMDos) on the basis of and for the use with massively distributed, loosely coupled resources, objects, etc. (e.g. Aperion (Apertos (Muse)) and TUNES OS)), and
• Grid Computing (GC or GridC) (cluster of networked, loosely coupled computers acting in concert) and Grid Computing of the second generation (GC 2.0 or GridC 2.0) of us,

as a cure for the deficits of PaaSx introduced in 2008. See also the Clarification of the 1st of December 2018 and the related Website update of the 9th of March 2019, and the note FOSHS reached peak long ago of the 17th of December 2018, and also the Clarification of the 21st of January 2020 and 26th of January 2020 (keywords Inter-Process Communication, IPC, microservice, and loosely).

But it does not stop here

• Semantic (World Wide) Web technologies (SWWWx) and standards (see the webpage Introduction of the website of OntoLinux), including
  • Semantic Web Services (SWS),
• Kernel-Less System (KLS) (see the section Basic Properties of the webpage Overview of the website of OntoLinux), including
  • Interconnected network (Internet),
  • World Wide Web (WWW),
  • Kernel-Less operating system (KLos) (kernel still required), including
    • KLos based on the Systems Programming using Address-spaces and Capabilities for Extensibility (SPACE) approach,
• Unified Parallel C (UPC) and X10 programming languages (see the section To Do of the webpage Project Status of the website of OntoLinux), which they could not understand at first (Parallel Computing (PC or ParaC) and Cluster Computing (CC or ClusterC)) (see the Investigations::Multimedia, AI and KM of the 8th of July 2018, Investigations::Multimedia of the 16th of March 2019, the notes SC strategy does not work without OS of the 31st of January 2024, and DCos, CNF, aaSx, SDN, SD-WAN, ON, OW, OV, etc. no license of the 27th of February 2024, and the other publications cited therein), and
• Boot to Web (B2W) Cloud Operating System (COS) Platform,

and

As we said, Cloud-native technologies (Cnx) with their foundational elements is what is called Cloud Computing of the third generation (CC 3.0) by us only for better understanding and eventually what is declared as 'R' Us by us for crystal clear understanding.

We quote a report, which is about what is wrongly called PaaS, BaaS, FaaS, SLC, CnC, and Cnx, and also Amazon Web Services, as well as our Ontologic Core (OntoCore), Ontologic roBot (OntoBot), Ontologic data storage Base (OntoBase), Ontologic File System (OntoFS), and so on, and was publicized on the 16th of July 2015: "PaaS Vendors, Watch Out! Amazon Is All Set To Disrupt the Market
The Platform as a Service (PaaS) market is going through metamorphosis [(see the chapter 2.7.2 Metamorphose of The Proposal)]. A key driver of this change is the container revolution, led by Docker Ontologics. Every PaaS vendor in the market has refactored its platform for containers. On the other hand, the combination of orchestration tools such as Kubernetes, Mesos, and Docker, is becoming an alternative to traditional PaaS. The line between container orchestration and PaaS is getting blurred. [...] one vendor who is quietly redefining PaaS is Amazon Web Services.

Having invested heavily in the core building blocks of infrastructure [as a Service (IaaS)] - compute, storage, and networking [- or being precise our Ontologic System Components (OSC)]; Amazon has been steadily moving up the stack to focus on platform services. From its vantage point, AWS has visibility into top customer use cases and deployment scenarios. By carefully analyzing what customers run in its infrastructure, AWS is building new managed services that are quickly becoming an alternative to self-hosted workloads. Amazon [Relational Database Service (]RDS[) (see OntoBase)], AWS Directory Services, Amazon Elastic File System [(2015) (see OntoFS)], [...], and Amazon EC2 Container Service [(2014) (see OntoCore and the comment to this quote below)] are a few examples of these services. [...] Beyond enterprise and business applications, it is now eyeing developers by offering a parallel universe of application lifecycle management in the cloud [(see the webpage Overview of the website of OntoLinux for our Ontoverse and the fields of Operations Management (OM), Quality Management (QM), and Product Lifecycle Management (PLM)]. The new family of code management services [...] handle the entire lifecycle of a cloud-native application. Amazon is in the process of building a brand new PaaS that is very different from the rest[, which is no surprise at all, because it is an essential part of our original and unique masterpiece titled Ontologic System and created by C.S.)].

Amazon API Gateway [(2015)] - an application programming interface management layer - is the latest addition to the AWS application services portfolio. Though it might just look like another service from AWS, this has the potential to become the cornerstone of AWS' PaaS strategy. Amazon is calling this service the "front door" for applications to access data, business logic, and functionality from back-end services [(see our OntoBot)]. API Gateway is another classic customer workload that became a managed service on the AWS cloud. [...]
Last year [(2014)], [...] unveiled a killer microservices platform called AWS Lambda. In a [...] Research report entitled Why AWS Lambda is a Masterstroke from Amazon, I analyzed the importance of this service. What's special about Lambda is that it is a true [No Operations (]NoOps[) respectively deployment, monitoring, maintenance, and improvement automation] platform [(see once again our OntoBot) and the webpage Overview)]. Developers bring their autonomous independent or unconnected code snippets that get invoked by an external event. Since its inception, AWS has been regularly adding Lambda hooks for popular services like [Simple Storage Service (]S3[)], DynamoDB, Kinesis [real-time data streaming service (see once again our OntoBot)], and [Simple Notification Service (]SNS[)]. It recently added Java language and JDK [(see once again our multiparadigmatic and multilingual OntoBot)] to this microservices platform. Though it was tempting to port the bulk of the business logic and workflow from monolithic apps to AWS Lambda, the service didn't support exposing the code snippets as REST endpoints. Developers had to rely on service hooks to indirectly trigger Lambda functions.

One of the most powerful aspects of the new Amazon API Gateway, is its integration with AWS Lambda [see our Ontologic System Architecture (OSA) and Ontologic System Components (OSC))]. Developers can upload code snippets to Lambda and expose it as a standard REST endpoint hosted by the API Gateway, which essentially becomes the facade to the microservices platform [(see once again our OntoBot and our comments above)]. This service eliminates the need to spin up an EC2 instance that runs business logic exposed as an API. What's more? Developers can point and click to configure an API key, throttling, bursting, caching and even adding a custom domain. Finally, they can also generate native [Software Development Kits (]SDKs[)] of their APIs for Android, iOS, and JavaScript. This combination of AWS Lambda and API Gateway becomes a powerful microservices platform without the tax of [(list points added)]

[(see the list of subfields of os and SOx, and projects of CnC at the beginning of this note)]. Both API Gateway and AWS Lambda are elastic, enabling the developer to focus on the logic and code. Through the integration of CloudTrail and CloudWatch, performance metrics and logs are instantly available [(see the related basic properties and parts of our OS)]. Microservices hosted in AWS Lambda can consume AWS SDK to communicate with other services such as Amazon RDS and Amazon DynamoDB [(see once again our OntoBot and OntoBase)]. This deployment topology makes applications highly available, scalable and secure with no operations required. Deploying the same applications on a traditional PaaS involves quite a bit of configuration and management.

But API endpoints and code do not make an application complete. It needs an interface to become web applications and mobile apps [(see our OntoGraphics and Ontologic Collaborative Ontologic Virtual Environment (OntoCOVE))]. Since the heavy-lifting is offloaded to AWS Lambda, all that the developer needs to do is to host the web application that consumes the API exposed by the API Gateway. This is where Amazon S3's web hosting feature comes in handy. Designers and developers can build beautiful web interfaces based on [...] frameworks. Since API Gateway supports the generation of JavaScript SDK [(see the section To Do of the webpage Project Status of the website of OntoLinux for ECMAScript (ECMA-262) (hint JavaScript standard, etc.))], it can be consumed in static web applications hosted in Amazon S3. The same API can be targeted by native Android and iOS applications [(see once again our OntoCOVE)]. For authentication and security, the application can be integrated with Identity and Access Management (IAM) [(see for example the section Operating System Security of the webpage of our OntoFS and note that Security-Enhanced Linux (SELinux) was integrated in 2009)]. This configuration completely avoids the need to spin EC2 instances dedicated to hosting applications. The combination of S3, API Gateway, and AWS Lambda delivers scale without the need for administration.

Amazon's microservices-based PaaS [respectively its partial copy of our Kernel-Less Distributed operating system (KLDos), and microService-Oriented technologies (mSOx), including mSOPaaSx, and what is called ServerLess Computing (SLC), service-based Peer-to-Peer (P2P), and Service-to-Service (S2S) computing, and also Cloud-native Computing (CnC) and Cloud-native technologies (Cnx) by others and Cloud 3.0 by us only for better understanding] expects developers to bring just code and data. When PaaS was envisaged in 2008, its promise was to enable developers to focus on code and data without worrying about infrastructure. Even in its latest avatar, PaaS hasn't been able to deliver this promise.

[...]

Amazon's aggressive push Our original and unique masterpieces Evoos and OS impacts everyone in the PaaS and [Backend as a Service (]BaaS[)] markets. Existing vendors need to evolve to make it easy to deploy and manage microservices. [But they also have to become a member and licensee partner of our SOPR.]

The roadmap for Amazon's PaaS is well laid out [by C.S. and our corporation]. AWS teams are busy integrating the platform with one of its recent acquisitions, [...] an IoT PaaS startup [(see our Ubiquitous Computing of the second generation (UbiC 2.0) and Internet of Things of the second generation (IoT 2.0), Cyber-Physical System of the second generation (CPS 2.0), and Networked Embedded System of the second generation (NES 2.0), including our Industrial Internet of Things (IIoT) and Industry of the fourth generation (I 4.0), Industry of the fifth generation (I 5.0), and Industry of the sixth generation (I 6.0), and also our Global Brain of the second generation (GB 2.0), and so on.)]. Eventually, AWS PaaS will support IoT specific protocols [...]. API Gateway and Lambda will play a significant role in the IoT PaaS. Developers will be able to connect the dots for ingesting, streaming, querying, storing and analyzing sensor data without writing complex code."

Comment
Copyright infringement by both, the author of that bought marketing material and Amazon. The presented platform is just the related parts of our Evolutionary operating system (Evoos) with its Evoos Architecture (EosA) and our Ontologic System (OS) with is OS Architecture (OSA) created by C.S..
So much about true masterpieces on the one hand and plagiarisms and fakes on the other hand.

We were also able to connect the final dots. For an easier introduction to the subject or a refresher on material already known see the

and also the

We also quote an online encyclopedia about the subject key-value database: "A key-value database, or key-value store, is a data storage paradigm designed for storing, retrieving, and managing associative arrays, and a data structure more commonly known today as a dictionary or hash table."

Comment
Content-Addressable Memory (CAM) respectively Associative Memory (AM), and Content-Addressable Storage (CAS) are implemented as Key-Value (K-V) store.
BlackBoard pattern (e.g. Tuple Space, etc.) is Associative Memory (AM).

The cluster management system and container engine Google Borg is based on the Master-Worker (MW) pattern and uses the Kernel Virtual Machine (KVM) and cgroups of the Linux operating system (os) kernel.
Our Evoos has AM and MAS, hence BB, and created osVM and os-level virtualization or containerization, (foundation of) microService-Oriented Architecture (mSOA), and some other parts of Service-Oriented technologies (SOx) besides (foundation of) Software-Defined Networking (SDN), and so on. HyperBingo!!!
Please recall that chroot jail is no security mechanism and chroot jail and FreeBSD jail are no virtualization.

The cluster management system, container orchestration system, and container engine Kubernetes implements the Master-Worker (MW) pattern on the basis of a Key-Value (K-V) store as part of an integration with the fields of operating system Virtual Machine (osVM), os-level virtualization or containerization (here Docker), and microServices (see also the Investigations::Multimedia of the 22nd of October 2019 (keywords agent and kvstore)). HyperBingo!!!

Furthermore, due to the reason that Borg has runtime features, Kubernetes has a runtime, and both also run on bare metal, they must have functionalities of an operating system (os) kernel. HyperBingo!!!

We always explained that we moved the MAS middleware and also Service-Oriented Architecture of the first generation (SOA 1.0) (e.g. Java Jini with JavaSpaces) into (the kernel of) a Reflective operating system (Ros), a Virtual Machine (VM), and an operating system Virtual Machine (osVM), Kernel Virtual Machine (KVM), microVirtual Machine (mVM), etc. with our Evoos and (foundation of) microService-Oriented Architecture (mSOA) and added a Kernel-Less operating system (KLos) and Cluster Computing technologies (CCx) with our OS.
Our OS even integrates plagiarisms and fakes explicitly, including

which of course includes (the functionalities of) Docker, Kubernetes, and so on.
It also shows another time that Kubernetes, OpenShift, etc. comes from us, because KBDB has also KVM from our Evoos and cgroups from the Linux® and Unix® kernels and hence from our OS.
And what we have here with Kubernetes, etc. is the very foundational and essential, original and unique architecture of the core of our Evoos and our OS.
And about

we also do not need to discuss about anymore, because we have an Immobot as agent of the same Holonic Agent System (HAS) (HAS is an MAS) included in our Evoos and our OntoBot.
A simple implication is that all other

are also copyright infringements of our Evoos and our OS, including our Grid operating system™ (Gos) and Cloud operating system™ (Cos).

Now, we also do know why KBDB exists at all and consider it as a copyright infringement as well and will mark it accordingly.

Now, we also do know why those virtualization, container and microservice management, orchestration, federation, and runtime systems, platforms, applications, and services got this response, became so popular, and have been taken by all the others and why it is one of the central pieces of what is wrongly called Cloud-native Computing (CnC).

Kubernetes is only editing and modification, which does not constitute an own new expression of idea, but interferes with, and also obstructs, undermines, and harms the exclusive moral rights and infringes the copyright of C.S. and other rights of our corporation.

One can also see the 3 different strategies to steal our Evoos and our OS by segmenting and segmenting and separating respectively editing and modifying them into os and PaaSx, FaaSx, and SaaSx again, and also giving them an illegal designation with Cloud-native:

In the next step, both took the other direction as part of simulating freedom of choice, innovation, and competition.
The other different strategies with the same goal are the so-called multi-cloud, hybrid cloud, and edge computing:

But our investigations, clarifications, and other related publications show doubtlessly that they all had options, but only made choices only to arrive at illegal plagiarisms and fakes of our Evoos and our OS.
All these strategies and developments are another proof that it is our Evoos with its EosA and our OS with its OSA and the next evidence that our Evoos and our OS have taken as source of inspiration and blueprint without allowance and license.
As we already said in October 2023: "They took our Evoos (as the foundation) for SOx and Cloud 2.0 as an intermediate development only to arrive at our mSOA and Cloud 3.0 once again. This raises the question if we should call it Cloud 3.0 at all, because it already was the successor of Cloud 1.0" and already questioned that no Cloud 3.0 existed at all.

One can also see why they tried to steal our Evoos on the basis of Resource-Oriented technologies (ROx) and a lot more.

And now, we also do know why the several federal authorities and agencies were trying and still are trying to get the control over the related properties of C.S. and our corporation all the time.

We already proved it, but now we can easily explain it to a judge or another non-expert.

Interesting that it already works so perfectly as designed by C.S. despite it is not complete.

Thus, without any doubt, we have shown once again that our claims and demands have been fully justified.

By the way:

• Common Object Request Broker Architecture (CORBA), specifically CORBA Med around the 14th of May 1998 and CORBA Components around the 29th of May 1999,
• Cluster Computing based on Unix® around 21st of June 1999, MOSIX around 10th of October 1999, etc., while working on The Proposal describing our Evoos, and
• Grid Computing (GC or GridC) and High-Throughput Computing (HTC), specifically Berkeley Open Infrastructure for Network Computing (BOINC) middleware system around the 30th of Aprill 2002 and 20th of August 2002 and HTCondor around the 30th of May 2003,

and also a

• new business unit, for which a designated employee of our corporation was commissioned with setting up a BOINC website, which has been frustrated by ridiculous faults added deliberately in the installation scripts and the source code (witness, emails, and other forensically evaluable material do exist).

Obviously, we are not talking blah blah blah and are not doing any vodoo or mentalism here.