In general, forget all these things and also what the Mozilla Foundation and other Free and Open Source Software (FOSS) projects are doing without authorization, because we already have our Ontologic roBot (OB or OntoBot) and the related infrastructures of our SOPR and our other Societies with their set of facilities, technologies, goods, and services.
Actually, we do not think that the current situation is guaranteed to persist, because it will be transformed into a truly legal one, which is in line with the Terms of Service (ToS) with its License Model (LM) of our SOPR. But we must hear other opinions at first, for example about the intentions and calculations behind the pricing models and the couplings with other technologies, goods, and services in general, though we can already tell that there will be only one LM and we prefer a fixed fee and a relative share from the manufacturers and providers, and also professional users, but not the private enduser. After all, OS with its Ontoverse (Ov) and New Reality (NR) is the successor of the Interconnected network (Internet), the World Wide Web (WWW), and the various (information) spaces, environments, worlds, and universes respectively realities.

03.March.2025

00:38 UTC+1
SOPR checking FAA Verizon contract for legality

Our Society for Ontological Performance and Reproduction (SOPR) is checking the contract granted by the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) to the company Verizon for legal validity. Very short and simple, if

This holds for other providers as well.

We also would like to mention that governments and their federal authorities should avoid very expensive legal interfaces.

10:47, 11:12, and 20:47 UTC+1
Comment of the Day

"It's the crypto, stupid.", [C.S., Today]

We wonder how a reserve of

See also the note

21:08 and 23:10 UTC+1
Deutsche Telekom still in LaLaLand

That next illegal clone of our original and unique Ontoscope (Os), which is also wrongly and illegally called smartphone and Artificial Intelligence (AI) phone, is another waste of time and money, which shows once again the incompetence of the company in relation to many artistical, legal, economical, and technological aspects.
In fact, the company Humane with its very similar failure by design of an illegal integration of our Ontologic roBot (OB or OntoBot) and Ontoscope (Os) with mobile or mini projector instead of a display was sold for 116 million U.S. Dollar to HP on the 19th of February 2025 after it raised 240 million U.S. Dollar of venture capital from investors, including the Chief Executive Officer (CEO) of the company OpenAI, and after promoting its Ontoscope plagriarism and fake in the wearable variant since around November 2023.
Potentially, that next nonsense project in a series of similar fraudulent and even serious criminal actions is just only done to mislead the public once again. But this time, we are in a very comfortable legal position and will take legal actions.

In general, our Society for Ontological Performance and Reproduction (SOPR) does not give the allowance and license for the performance and reproduction of certain parts of our original and unique Ontologic System (OS), including the integration of our Ontologic roBot (OB or OntoBot) and our Ontoscope (Os), which comprises the cases of Humane and Deutsche Telekom, because such an integration violates the Terms of Service (ToS) of our SOPR, including the social compromise for opening our OS and allowing and licensing the performance and reproduction of certain parts of it.
Even after the analysis on the basis of standard industry-proven examination and assessment methods regarding the

this specific endeavour and related start-ups with their partial plagiarisms and fakes of our Ontologic roBot (OntoBot), and Ontologic Search (OntoSearch) and Ontologic Find (OntoFind) have no future for said reason and many other reasons.

The reason why

have said allowance and license is that these companies are already designated Joint Venture Partners (JVPs), which would be controlled by our corporation, respectively subsidiaries.
Consequently, if these JVPs will not be realized, then they also get no allowance and license for this integration of our OB and Os, but only for the reproduction of our Os as their own Os variants and the performance of our OntoBot, OntoSearch and OntoFind, and much more as their utilization of the exclusive and mandatory infrastructures of our SOPR and our other Societies with their set of foundational and essential facilities, technologies, goods, and services under the

which are already the compromise, and the

which

as discussed again and again and more than only crystal clearly.

By the way:

23:05 UTC+1
TSMC very high ratio of damages with ca. 86%:14%

For sure, the company Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing Company (TSMC) will also pay damage compensations and its fair share, like very other entity will do.
Correspondingly, payment of damage compensations, the higher of apportioned compensation, profit, and its business value or market capitalization increased, which has reached a ratio of around 86% for us and 14% for it. Otherwise the chains will be cut off. :)

04.March.2025

Comment of the Day

"The meme reserve.", [C.S., Today]

See also the

05.March.2025

15:34 UTC+1
Further steps

We have begun with drawing the big graphic, which shows the existential relations of fields in general and our vision, expression of idea, compilation, selection, composition, integration, unification, fusion, design, architecture, component, etc..
The fields are those, which we have listed again and again in the related messages, notes, explanations, clarifications, investigations, and claims.
Some smaller graphics based on the big graphic will show the details in relation to selected examples, which were discussed on this website of OntomaX and comprise the fields of

This big graphic will not be complete, but sufficiently exhaustive to see that an enourmous complexity is in place, a considerable amount of time has been invested to work through, and also a huge creative process created by us, so that our claims are correct.
The early working version of it with around 60 fields is already quite impressive and convincing for both, non-experts and experts, as is the case for the gathered evidences and explanations in relation to the at least 30 illegal actions, which might easily result in 100 accusations showing a war of governments, federal agencies, institutes, including universities, research companies, etc., industries, including media companies, and other entities against C.S. and our corporation and not just a permant violation of the moral rights and copyrights of C.S., and the copyrights and competition rights of our corporation.

We will publicate all graphics on the related webpages of Ontologics, such as the webpages of OntoLinux and OntoLix.

See also the

17:11, 18:40, 19:11, and 26:00 UTC+1
Images of the Day

We created some collages in relation to our Ontologic System (OS) with its Ontologic Net (ON), Ontologic Web (OW), Ontologic roBot (OB), and other Ontologic System Components (OSC) and also the history, evolution, and scope of the fields of operating system-level Virtualization (osV) or containerization, microVirtual Machine (mVM), microServices (mS), ServerLess (SL or SeL), StateLess (SL or StL), Infrastructure as a Service (IaaS), Cloud, Edge, and Fog Computing (CEFC), Cloud-native Computing (CnC), Information-Centric Networking (ICN), etc., which we might publicized as well.

The following is a temporary collage of some of said collages focusing on the history and evolution of virtualization, container orchestration, as a Service (aaS), Cloud-native Computing (CnC), etc..

© ..., and C.S.

Some of these collages are under slight revision (e.g. container orchestration and schedulers, right middle).

The following is a temporary collage of some of said collages focusing on the network, infrastructure, Interconnected supercomputer (Intersup), (parallel) Wide Area Network (WAN) cluster, (Wide Area) Distributed SuperComputer (DSC or DSupC), Bionic Internet and Intersup, and Resilient Bionic and Robotic Space-Based Wide Area Network (RBRSBWAN), Universal Space and formerly Global Grid, Smart Grid, Cognitive Grid, etc., Distributed System (DS), Client-Server (CS), Peer-to-Peer (P2P), Many-to-Many (M2M), Virtual Environment (VE), Blackboard (BB), Tuple Space (TS), Information-Centric Networking (ICN), Space-Based Architecture (SBA), Semantic Web of Things (SWoT), our ActorAgent System (AAS) based on Actor Model or Actor-Based System (concurrent, ...) and Agent-Based System (ABS) (see also SD-WAN, telco cloud, etc. below), etc..

© ..., and C.S.

One can see where the Bionics (e.g. AI, ML, CI, ANN, ABS, MAS, CAS, SC, etc.), and aaS, Resource-Oriented Computing (ROC), Autonomic Computing (AC), Robotic Automation (RA), etc., and also their integrations, etc. come from and makes our ON, OW, and OV what is wrongly called Artificial Intelligence (AI) infrastructure, AI supercomputer, AI supercomputer infrastructure, AI cluster, AI cluster infrastructure, AI cloud, Intelligent Cloud, Edge, and Fog Computing (ICEFC), intelligent cloud infrastructure, etc..

The following is a temporary collage of some of said collages with network, infrastructure, Interconnected supercomputer (Intersup), Software-Defined Wide Area Network (SD-WAN), virtualization, Resource-Oriented Computing (ROC), Robotic Automation (RA), network slicing, telco cloud, etc..

© ..., and C.S.

Please note that our 5G NG, 6G, orchestration, network slicing, etc. are based on our what is wrongly and illegally called operating system-level Virtualization (osV) or containerization, Cloud, Edge, and Fog Computing (CEFC), Cloud-native Computing (CnC), and so on, as shown above.

The following is a temporary collage of some of said collages with Ubiquitous Computing of the first generation (UbiC 1.0), Internet of Things of the first generation (IoT 1.0), Ubiquitous Computing of the second generation (UbiC 2.0), Internet of Things of the second generation (IoT 2.0) respectively OntoNet of Things (ONoT), Cyber-Physical System (CPS), Model-Based Autonomous System (MBAS) or Immobile Robotic System (ImRS or Immobot), Digital Twin, Ontologic holon (Onton), Ambient Intelligence of the second generation (AmI 2.0), Industry of the fourth generation (I 4.0), Industry of the fifth generation (I 5.0), Industry of the sixth generation (I 6.0), Industrial Internet of Things (IIoT), Universal Space and formerly Global Grid, Smart Grid, Cloud, Edge, and Fog Computing (CEFC), etc..

© ..., and C.S.

The following is a temporary collage of some of said collages with Ubiquitous Computing of the first generation (UbiC 1.0), Cloud Computing of the first generation (CC 1.0), Magic Communicating applications (Magic Cap) platform, office suite, Semantic (World Wide) Web (SWWW), Multi-Agent System (MAS), multimodal dialogue management, multi-agent dialog system, smart interface, Conversational Agent System (CAS or ConAS), Belief-Desire-Intention (BDI) agent architecture, mobile agent, social agent, Holonic Agent System (HAS), Mixed Reality (MR), Humanistic Computing (HC), Personal Digital Assistant (PDA), smartphone, smarttablet, Robotic System (RS), Ontoscope (Os), etc..

© ..., and C.S.

Please note that the Gen-NL Agent Faciliator is based on Natural Language Generation (NLG), but is not based on Artificial Neural Network (ANN), which was created by us with the initial version of our Evolutionary operating system (Evoos) with its coherent Ontologic Model (OM), which agian was directly developed further to the version based on the integrated subsymbolic and symbolic approach.

The collages are showing more the transition from works of prior art to early plagiarisms and fakes of our creations.
They also fit together in accordance with our Evolutionary operating system Architecture (EosA) and Ontologic System Architecture (OSA).
Fields, like for example operating system, and formal analysis and modelling, Bridge from Natural Intelligence (NI) to Artificial Intelligence (AI), more multimedia, and so on, are not shown (in more detail).

We also have some collages for other fields and our integrations.

Obviously, we do know and created what we are talking about.

By the way:

20:00 UTC+1
Licensing partners will confirm ™ © etc.

We have no clue about what start-ups, investors, media companies, governments, and other entities are still talking.
This complete thing is ours and the legal situation is crystal clear.
And we already showed that the separation trick did not work, does not work, and will not work anymore, because they have always stolen from the same expression of idea and each separated part, including what is wrongly and illegally called cloud, large language model, chatbot, conversational AI, and so on is violating the moral rights respectively Lanham (Trademark) rights of C.S..

The only legal loophole is the bottom-up constructed, hallucinating purely subsymbolic Artificial Neural Network (ANN) (aka. brute force approach), some of its basic integrations and utilizations, and some other very basic things due to prior art, but they are not relevant at all due to our creation, compilation, selection, composition, integration, unification, fusion, design, architecture, component, and so on (e.g. Conversational, Cognitive, Cloud, microService, as a Service, Mixed Reality, etc.). In fact, a relevant Large Language Model (LLM) is based on the integrated (unified or integrated) subsymbolic and symbolic approach, including what is wrongly and illegally called Reasoning Language Model (RLM) respectively unified or integrated LLM, or symbol processing LLM, which together with our ontologic approach and our top-down approach respectively all in one approach (e.g. single ontology, coherent, model-reflective Ontologic Model (OM), ontological frame, group of ontologies, pretrained LLM, context, (agent, user) ontology, specification, prompt engineering, etc.) is always an essential part of our original and unique Evolutionary operating system (Evoos) with tis coherent Ontologic Model (OM) and our Ontologic System (OS) with its Ontologic roBot (OB or OntoBot), which again

Playing on time does not work either. The statute of limitation is longer, because of wire fraud, investment fraud, conspiracy, corruption, and so on.
That game is over.

And we are very sure that we do have the high burden required for a preliminary injunction in all cases, specifically due to the reason that huge damages are still done.

By the way:

07.March.2025

01:44 UTC+1
SOPR preparing start in P.R.China

For sure, P.R.Chinese entities will not get the original and unique ArtWorks (AWs) and further Intellectual Properties (IPs) included in the oeuvre of C.S. for free any longer, but have to sign, pay, and comply, which means pay damage compensations, make their fair shares respectively pay royalties, transfer illegal materials, and do the other legally required actions, like every other entity on planet Earth and beyond.
This is just what a mature society does and we are absolutely convinced without having to give further friendly recommendations that we will not need to discusse the basics and benefits of a rule-based law and order environment, but instead will correct all misdevelopments of the past together. :)
In this relation, we would like to make the following recommendations:

The markets in North America, Europe, Middle East, India, Australia, and a lot of other regions, unions of states, and countries demand all legally required actions as well.
And we are also absolutely convinced without having to give further friendly recommendations that their national entities will support us as well. :)

Specifically, we are already looking forward to taking over the company Alibaba and some other companies and working together as joint venture partners and subsidiaries of our corporation.
The win-win could never be greater and the lucky dragon could never be happier.

03:30 UTC+1
SOPR's fixed fee also guarantees income for JVPs

We would like to recall that the Terms of Service (ToS) with its License Model (LM) of our Society for Ontological Performance and Reproduction (SOPR) includes as one of several measures respectively regulations against the so-called race to the bottom and dumping price on our expense the asking for a minimum fixed fee in case a relative share of a revenue is just too low.
This approach also guarantees income for our Joint Venture Partners (JVPs).
Eventually, one still gets the allowance and license for the performance and reproduction of certain parts of an expression of idea created by C.S., but not for a smallest or a cheapest implementation of said parts.

08.March.2025

22:00 UTC+1
How should we call ... Top Secret?

How should we call our next original and unique, visionary and unbelievable, unforeseeable and unexpected, personal, metaphysical and science-fictional, and copyrighted and prohibited for fair dealing and fair use magic created by C.S. with which in the following our Joint Ventures (JVs) and subsidiaries, and also business units, such as Amazon, Alibaba, and Top Secret - Only for Partners, and also Ontonics, Style of Speed, Boeing, and Top Secret - Only for Partners will change everything once again: mobility, transportation, logistics, travel, supply chain, and for sure nothing less than civilization?

22:33 UTC+1
Remove that AI crap from Firefox immediately

HuggingChat and other illegal Free and Open Source Software (FOSS), and other unauthorized performance and reproduction of certain parts of our Evolutionary operating system (Evoos) and our Ontologic System (OS) will not be tolerated, specifically pretrained and prompt engineered subsymbolic or connectionist systems or Artificial Neural Networks (ANNs), including top-down, all-in-one Large Language Models (LLM).
They have to

Have fun doing all the work, which we did before in the end of the 1990s, instead of freeloading.

This time we are on the longer part of the legal lever.

14.March.2025

05:05, 15:11, 20:20, and 26:00 UTC+1
Further steps

We would like to share some thoughts about legal matter in relation to

One topic is what is called Cloud, like for example the Google Cloud Platform (GCP), including

and

As we always explain, the problem of the separation trick is the original and unique vision, expression of idea, compilation, selection, composition, integration, unification, fusion, design, architecture, component, etc., but no Application Programming Interface (API), no accrued talent, no etc..
The integration is our architecture, but not merely the integration of only prior art, but also of our work of art.
The same legal situation applies to Amazon Web Services (AWS), Microsoft Azure (MA), Oracle Cloud (OC), Alibaba Cloud (AC), OVH respectively OVHcloud vCloud Air, etc.
The same with our coherent Ontologic Model (OM), including Large Language Model (LLM), and our Ontologic roBot (OB or OntoBot), including Conversational Artificial Intelligence (CAI or ConAI), Retrieval Augmented Generation (RAG), and so on.

Another topic is the

At first, we recall a legal case, which was recently ruled by a court.
In general, an owner of a stolen property gets it back respectively a violation of a right or a theft of a property has to be stopped.
A specific common law, that would change a right to control a property by an owner, takes many decades to become effective and therefore is irrelevant in our case.

In particular, the value of a premise is not increased by a building constructed illegally on it, but the value of the whole real estate, including the land and the unwanted building.
The owner of the premise is entitled to payment of a customary

Alternatively, the owner of the premise can buy the building, but only the costs of construction deducted by the damages must be paid, because the value of the building is not increased by the location, location, location, which after all is an attribute of the premise. Is not it?

In our legal case, the situation is considerably different.
We do not see an increase of the value of the rights and properties of C.S. and our corporation, but a damage of said rights and properties, and also the reputation and the momenta of said owners by an unauthorized performance and reproduction (implementation, operation, and provision) by a plagiarist and also an illegal establishment of a new business (unit) on top of those illegal actions by said plagiarist, whereby the costs of said actions are neglectable, if related to our corporation value, which is always present, and another company value, which was increased illegally, and can simply be deducted from the damage compensations, the higher of apportioned

according to the apportionment analysis on the basis of standard industry-proven examination and assessment methods.
Eventually, we will definitely not pay a plagiarist for the

to get back control over our original and everything else.
And a new business (unit) established by another company is worthless, because it is our business, so that only a prior core business of said other company remains, but even no essential facilities.
After all, it is called freedom of choice, creation and innovation, and competition for the benefit of the public.

We also would like to recall what we already said in a note on the 19th of July 2024: "Eventually, that obsolete discussion leads us back to the point that no expropriation of our original and unique OS created by C.S. is possible due to either

And all those fraudulent and even serious criminal activities will be stopped in one way or another.
The whole discussion also shows once again why legal actions and our proper preparation of the set of legal documents are required, because they are still trying and will never stop trying to get the control over the rights and properties of C.S. and our corporation.

See also the notes

and the other publications cited therein.

05:05 and 20:00 UTC+1
Utah bill demands IDAMS by appstores

IDentity and Access Management System (IDAMS)
We would like to share our thoughts, opinions, and decisions of our Society for Ontological Performance and Reproduction (SOPR) regarding a bill of the government of the state Utah, U.S.America.

The bill of the U.S.American state Utah is much too

and therefore is even

and somehow is a

All entities concerned, specifically all service providers, are in the same boat, which demands a multi-stage, -level, or -area approach at the appstores, on the social media platforms, and potentially elsewhere, for example in the devices.

But we also have the opinion that managing and operating the IDAMS of our SOPR for this use case as well also provides certain opportunities and benefits.

17.March.2025

17:36 UTC+1
Further steps
Ordered insolvency of big biz

*** Work in progress - some better formulation ***
We continued with the elaboration of the procedure for the

specifically the payment of damage compensations.

In contrast to the partily incorrectly ruled lawsuit of Oracle vs. Google regarding the copyrighted Java Virtual Machine (JVM) and its Application Programming Interface (API) (of the whole programming language Java), the question of the copyright protection is not given in our case to our benefit at all, because no API in particular and no legal argument of accrued talents in general exist at all (precedent has to be corrected by the U.S.American parliament).
The same holds for the other rights and properties of C.S. and our corporation, such as in case of selling and trading our corporation at the stock markets.

No statute of limitations of 3 years, as in case of ordinary copyright law, and no statute of limitations of 10 years, as in case of ordinary civil code, but 20 or 30 years.
20 years damages, the higher of ..., as compromise. Otherwise, we will also execute the law line by line, which means essential facilities only without interferring with, and also obstructing, undermining, and harming the moral rights respectively. Lanham (Trademark) rights, which means nothing, because the whole Thing 'R' Us.
Most potentially (rule of thumb)

The ordered insolvency of big tech, big banks, big media, etc. is required, including the freeze of trading of their stocks at the markets, as part of financial products, and so on.

The last remaining problem is the investment by the group of small private investors in (pension) funds.

Investors can decide to

We demand the banks to freeze funds and other financial products, and begin with removing big tech out of the investment portfolio.

See also the notes

and the other publications cited therein.

18.March.2025

06:45 UTC+1
Question of the Day

"What is broken with their moral compass?", [C.S., sometimes]

18:10 UTC+1
Further steps

*** Work in progress ***
We would like to share a lot of loosely compiled thoughts about some related fields, which were state of the art around the years 1997 before the presentation of our Evolutionary operating system (Evoos) to 2006 before the presentation of our Ontologic System (OS).

We made a little review in relation to the fields of

We also recalled what we did around 1996 and remembered the intentions, deficits, mistakes of others and the motivation, new expression of idea, etc. of us when creating our Evoos and presenting it in 1999, which was already a further development of what only came in the following decade with for example WSSOA, Cloud 2.0, etc., and even became obsolete when creating our OS and presenting it in 2006 resulting in overall (kernel-less) true Peer-to-Peer System (P2PS), Cloud 3.0, Cloud-native (Cn), etc..
While gathering evidences in relation to Service-Oriented technologies (SOx), Web Services (WS), etc. several topics, observations, questions, answers, etc. arose, specifically the question what was created by us.

We continued with the a little review mentioned in the Further steps of the 8th of March 2025 (moved here) and reviewed the historical development of the last 34 years.

We need legal substance and a clear white, yellow, or red line respectively exact scope of ... the Ontoverse (Ov) , etc., because many not so nice entities are participating in the governments, federal authorities, industries, markets, and other areas of societies.

See also the

See also the

Cloud Computing of the second generation (CC 2.0)

We already discussed

in

We also already discussed

We also already discussed

in the

We looked at Service-Oriented technologies (SOx) ...

In this note, we look at ...

Service-Oriented Architecture (SOA)
"[...] connected them through a service bus or a network [...] services running over a bus or communications protocol over a network [...] speak to one another through a messaging protocol ["Enterprise service bus (ESB) for communication [] Multiple message protocols"]" (configured Client-Server (CS))
"SOA is not Web Services - SOA describes an architectural paradigm that is detached from specific implementation methods and techniques.
SOA is not new - a service-oriented architecture could be implemented years before the term was introduced [in 1996] using the methods and procedures available at the time and was used in 1991 with [the Common Object Request Broker Architecture (]CORBA[)], among other things."

Distributed Object Architecture (DOA), Distribtued Object System (DOS) framework
Common Object Request Broker Architecture (CORBA),
Distributed Component Object Model (DCOM) (September 1996)
Service Object-Oriented Architecture (SOOA) (e.g. Common Object Request Broker Architecture (CORBA), Java Jini) (federated, discovered CS, Spontaneous Client-Server (SCS), (not(?)) Brokered Peer-to-Peer (BP2P) (see also superpeers)
"modular co-operating services [...] lookup service to retrieve a proxy object to the service"

Enterprise Service Bus (ESB)
special Client-Server (CS) (configured)
"special variant of the more general Client-Server model, wherein any application may behave as server or client [...] primary use is in Enterprise Application Integration (EAI) [...] also a common implementation pattern for Service-Oriented Architecture (SOA) [...] implementations of ESB use event-driven and standards-based message-oriented middleware in combination with message queues as technology frameworks"

Agent-Based System (ABS) and Multi-Agent System (MAS)

Event-Driven Architecture (EDA)
"Event-driven architecture can complement Service-Oriented Architecture (SOA)"

Web Service Architecture (WSA)
Web Services (WS) Microsoft .NET (June 2000), ASP.NET (January 2002)
"loose coupling (["Service-Oriented Computing", 2004]) of service components"

Service-Oriented technologies (SOx)
Service-Oriented Computing (SOC), Service-Oriented Programming (SOP)
Java Jini with OpenWings, .NET, CoolTown (discovered CS, Spontaneous Client-Server (SCS), brokered P2P)
"Component models prescribe that programming problems can be seen as independently deployable black box client / servers which communicate through contracts. [...] Service-oriented computing contains Components that publish and use services in a peer to peer manner."
see Evoos

microService Architecture (mSA)
microServices (mS), microService-Oriented Architecture (mSOA), or microService Architecture (mSA)

Grid Computing (GC or GridC)

Internet, Web, Industry, Things
Ubiquitous Computing (UbiC) and Internet of Things, Ubiquitous Networking (UbiN) (e.g. Java Jini, CoolTown)
Cyber-Physical System (CPS), digitial twin, Industry 4.0, 5.0, and 6.0, Industrial Internet of Things, etc.
Web of Things (WoT) (e.g. CoolTown)
Nomadic Computing (NC or NomC) (e.g. CoolTown)

EAI, SOA, WS, Semantic Web Enabled Web Services (SWWS), Semantic Web Services (SWS) (2001), Semantic Service-Oriented Architecture (SSOA) (2005)

"Where Is The Future of SOA Headed? Where The Web Goes" publicized on the 17th of November 2015
Please note that in this context web means its successor, which is our Ontologic Web (OW) with its Ontologic Web of Things (OWoT), Universal Brain Space (UBS), and so on.

Prior art

• Distributed operating system (Dos), including
  • Apertos (Muse) with Cognac (Active Object (AO)), Ultra-Large scale, Massively Distributed operating system (ULMDos) for the use with massively distributed, loosely coupled resources, objects, etc.,
  • TUNES OS (Actor Model (AM)) with model-reflective Arrow System (AS) (ontology, ontological frame, Language Model (LM), triple store (see also Resource Description Framework (RDF) and Web Ontology Language (OWL)), etc.),

• Parallel Virtual Machine (PVM) (1989),
• Message Passing Interface (MPI) (1991),

• interpreter Java Virtual Machine (JVM),
• template interpreter HotSpot JVM,
• interpreter with Just-In-Time (JIT) compiler,

• MSRPC,
• Component Object Model (COM)/Object Linking and Embedding (OLE),

• Common Object Request Broker Architecture (CORBA),
• Java system,

• synchronous,
• asynchronous,
• deferred,
• one-to-one or point-to-point,
• broadcasting,
• multicasting,

• BlackBoard System (BBS),
  • Tuple Space System (TSS), including
    • Linda System (LS),
  • Linda-like System (LlS),
  • CHemical Abstract Machine (CHAM),
  • etc.,

• Distributed Shared Memory (DSM), including
  • BlackBoard System (BBS) ("The Hearsay-II Speech-Understanding System: Integrating Knowledge to Resolve Uncertainty", 1980), including
    • Tuple Space System (TSS), including
      • Linda System (LS) is "coordination model that aids communication in parallel computing environments" (1979, 1986),
• message passing, including
  • Parallel Virtual Machine (PVM) is "communication protocol for programming[...] parallel computers" (1989),
  • Message Passing Interface (MPI) (1991),

• message passing,

• Actor Model (AM) based on
  • message passing,
• Distributed Shared Memory (DSM), including
  • BlackBoard System (BBS),

• Agent Communication Language (ACL) (see also ontology and ontological commitment),

• Multi-Agent System (MAS), including
  • Holonic Agent System (HAS)
• Intelligent Agent System (IAS), including
  • Belief-Desire-Intention (BDI) architecture,
• Autonomous Agent System (AAS),
• Model-Based Agent-Based System (MBABS),
• subsumption architecture,
• etc.,

• Common Object Request Broker Architecture (CORBA) RMI,

• Common Object Request Broker Architecture (CORBA),
• Distributed Component Object Model (DCOM),
• etc.,

• Java RMI,
• DotNet or .NET Remoting, superseded by .NET Windows Communication Foundation (WCF),
• Stubby, superseded by gRPC,
• Internet Communications Engine (ICE),

• Java 2 Platform, Enterprise Edition (Java EE, formerly J2EE),
• Java Jini with JavaSpaces Tuple Space System (TSS),
• .NET,
• etc.,

suspicious art

synchronous vs. asynchronous message passing
"The main used message types are the [(list points added)]

synchronous vs. asynchronous approaches, architectures, models
"Two common approaches to creating flexible, loosely-coupled systems are [(list points added)]

loosely coupled communication, utilization, collaboration

• BlackBoard System (BBS), including
  • System of Loosely Coupled Applications and Services (SLCAS),
  • Tuple Space System (TSS), including
    • Linda System (LS),
  • Linda-like System (LlS), and
  • Space-Based System (SBS) or Space-Based Architecture (SPA)

(UNIX) Remote Procedure Call (RPC) mechanism (RFC 707, 23rd of December 1975, 1976, May 1981), client-server protocol
(UNIX) Distributed Computing Environment (DCE) (1989) framework, "alternative to CORBA", discovered client-server
Distributed Computing Environment (DCE)/Remote Procedure Call (RPC) (DCE/RPC), client-server architecture
MSRPC, "modified version of DCE/RPC", "derived from the DCE 1.1 reference implementation", "served as the infrastructure for interprocess communication in Windows", "used [...] to seamlessly create a client/server model in Windows NT"
Common Object Model (COM) (1993)/Object Linking and Embedding (OLE) (1990) (COM/OLE), "based heavily on MSRPC", "COM infrastructure, on a single device - a PC running Windows"

Stubby "for microServices (mS)" (2001), gRPC (March 2015, 24th of August 2016)
"[...] define and enforce service contracts and to have consistency across cross-cutting features [...] RPC framework [...] handles all the complexities normally associated with enforcing strict service contracts [...] gRPC along with protocol buffers enables loose coupling, engineering velocity, higher reliability and ease of operations. Also, gRPC allows developers to write service definitions in a language-agnostic spec and generate clients and servers in multiple languages."

Distributed Object Architecture (DOA), Distributed Object System (DOS) 1.0 framework, Common Object Request Broker Architecture (CORBA) (October 1991), Distributed Component Object Model (DCOM) ""Network OLE", extends COM [...], publicly launched as a beta for Windows 95" (18th of September 1996)
DOA, DOS 2.0 framework Java 2 Platform, Enterprise Edition (J2EE) (Java 1.2 or 2 4th of December 1998, 17th of December 1999), Java Platform, Enterprise Edition (Java EE) (Java 1.5 or 5 30th of September 2004, 11th of May 2006), DotNet or ASP.NET

Distributed Object Communication (DOC), Remote Method Invocation (RMI)
CORBA (Common Object Request Broker Architecture) is based on RMI, "[...] CORBA (Common Object Request Broker Architecture) and RMI (Remote Method Invocation), are based on the client-server protocol"
"It would [...] be possible to implement a CORBA API using RPC." But then it would not be Object-Oriented (OO 1). See DOA 1.0 above.

DOS 2.0, Java Remote Method Invocation (RMI) (1998), DotNet or .NET Remoting (2002), "superseded by [.NET Windows Communication Foundation (]WCF[)]"
Java Jini, based on RMI, "infrastructure for Service Object-Oriented Architecture (SOOA)", "Jini technology is used to build systems that exhibit a service-oriented architecture."
Java Jini with JavaSpaces Tuple Space System (TSS), DOA, DOS, but not SOA and only infrastructure for SOOA
Java Jini with Openwings can be used for SOA, SOP, SOC

"The Service-Oriented Architecture (SOA) is an example of the composite computing model, which an architecture that uses distributed, discovery-based execution to expose and manage a collection of service-oriented software assets [...].
At the fundamental level, an SOA is a collection of services on a network that communicate with each other. The services are loosely coupled, have well-defined interfaces and are reusable."

Object-Oriented Programming (OOP), Object-Oriented Computing (OOC) with Distributed Object Architecture (DOA) = SOOA
Service-Oriented Programming (SOP), Service-Oriented Computing (SOC)

server-based DS (configured CS vs. discovered CS (e.g. SpontaneousCS), brokered P2P) vs. serverless DS (self-organized P2P vs. M2M)
physical network vs. virtual, overlay network
structured vs. unstructured overlay network

CS vs. hybrid (ServerP2P of CS, CS with ClientP2P) vs. P2P
centralized, configured, controlled, commanded vs. federated, distributed, discovered, spontaneous, brokered order vs. decentralized, self-organized resource (e.g. storage, compute cycles, content, human presence) and service availability
"[...] there are three main areas that determine whether a system is centralized [or hybrid (distributed centralized or federated (formerly decentralized) (P2P of CS) {discovered CS} or centralized distributed (CS with P2P {brokered P2P}))] or decentralized [(now federated and distributed)]:
1. Resource Discovery
2. Resource Availability
3. Resource Communication"
convergence of CS and P2P by added superpeers, and duplicated or replicated servers

DOA variant called discovered CS based on DCE/RPC, was only later described as brokered P2P, "three main areas that determine whether a system is centralized [or hybrid respectively discovered, brokered] or decentralized: 1. resource discovery 2. resource availability 3. resource communication"
SOP, SOC, emphasis of P2P manner, loosely coupled resources, objects, etc.
DOA is not SOA, but can be utilized for realization of SOA (e.g. CORBA).

discovered CS vs. brokered P2P
CORBA, Java Jini, WS
CORBA, Java Jini are discovered CS, (not(?)) brokered P2P, and not P2P.

P2P, including M2M

"A peer-to-peer network is designed around the notion of equal peer nodes simultaneously functioning as both "clients" and "servers" to the other nodes on the network. [...] Peer-to-peer networks generally implement some form of virtual overlay network on top of the physical network topology, where the nodes in the overlay form a subset of the nodes in the physical network."
"[...] there are two key differences compared to client/server based systems:

Interconnected network (Internet), World Wide Web (WWW)
"The Internet started as a peer-to-peer system. The goal of the original ARPANET was to share computing resources [...].", not self-organized
Usenet, P2P of CS, distributed centralized (formerly decentralized) or federated, "[...] Usenet, a distributed federated messaging system that is often [wrongly] described as an early peer-to-peer architecture, was established. It was developed in 1979 as a system that enforces a decentralized model of control.[15] The basic model is a client-server model from the user or client perspective that offers a self-organizing approach to newsgroup servers. However, news servers communicate with one another as peers to propagate Usenet news articles over the entire group of network servers."
Web server, centralized

M.T. Rose saw P2P trend and deficit and began work on BXXP, Internet Engineering Task Force (IETF) began BEEP workgroup in summer 2000, utilized as WS transport protocol
Sun Microsystems saw P2P trend and deficit and added JXTA in 2001.

Enterprise Service Bus (ESB) vs. concurrent model, Actor Model (AM)
We quote an online encyclopedia about the subject Enterprise Service Bus (ESB): "An enterprise service bus (ESB) implements a communication system between mutually interacting software applications in a service-oriented architecture (SOA). It represents a software architecture for distributed computing, and is a special variant of the more general client-server model, wherein any application may behave as server or client. ESB promotes agility and flexibility with regard to high-level protocol communication between applications. Its primary use is in enterprise application integration (EAI) of heterogeneous and complex service landscapes.

Architecture
The concept of the enterprise service bus is analogous to the bus concept found in computer hardware architecture combined with the modular and concurrent design of high-performance computer operating systems. The motivation for the development of the architecture was to find a standard, structured, and general purpose concept for describing implementation of loosely coupled software components (called services) that are expected to be independently deployed, running, heterogeneous, and disparate within a network. ESB is also a common implementation pattern for service-oriented architecture, including the intrinsically adopted network design of the World Wide Web.
No global standards exist for enterprise service bus concepts or implementations.[1] Most providers of message-oriented middleware have adopted the enterprise service bus concept as de facto standard for a service-oriented architecture. The implementations of ESB use event-driven and standards-based message-oriented middleware in combination with message queues as technology frameworks.[2] However, some software manufacturers relabel existing middleware and communication solutions as ESB without adopting the crucial aspect of a bus concept.

Functions
An ESB applies the design concept of modern operating systems to independent services running within networks of disparate and independent computers. Like concurrent operating systems, an ESB provides commodity services in addition to adoption, translation and routing of client requests to appropriate answering services.
[...]"

Comment
Enterprise Service Bus (ESB) vs. os, concurrent os, actor-based os, Distributed operating system (Dos)
We do not know, why an author wrote this. We cannot remember to have read something like this. "The key issue in distributed programming is partial failure. It is what makes distributed programing different from concurrent programming."
Enterprise Service Bus (ESB) vs. Client-Server (CS) vs. Peer-to-Peer (P2P)
"It [...] is a special variant of the more general client-server model, wherein any application [SOA component, service] may behave as server or client." It is called discovered CS model or Spontaneous CS (SCS), and later (somehow misleadingly) also called brokered P2P model, which is not more general, but just a federated model, which is a hybrid model of decentralized (federated and distributed) system architecture.
Enterprise Service Bus (ESB) vs. World Wide Web (WWW)
We looked at the history of the webpage and found that an author changed it on the 31st of July 2011. Before that change the explanation was fine, but now it looks like an attempt to claim for our Evolutionary operating system (Evoos) and our Ontologic System (OS) and to confuse ESB with Distributed operating system (Dos), and Service-Oriented Programming (SOP) or Service-Oriented Computing (SOC).

CS vs. concurrent architecture, Actor Model (AM), Multi-Agent System (MAS)
"MASs proposed in the literature rely on two approaches for communicating between agents [(breaks added)]:
1) the blackboard model [...] [... 1980] [...]; and
2) the actor model [based on message passing ...] [... 1977] [...] on the basis of various concurrent languages [... 1986 ...].
In the blackboard approach, knowledge sources use available information without knowing its origine and produce information without worrying about its fate, whereas in the actor approach, actors communicate with each other via message-passing. Actors may be considered as the basic element for building agents. The combination of the actor concept and the object[-oriented programming] paradigm leads to the notion of "agent-oriented programming"" [...]."
"[Java Agent Development Environment (]JADE[)] is [...] a middleware for the development and run-time execution of peer-to-peer applications which are based on the agents paradigm [...]. Two major aspects of the conceptual model are [...]: distributed system topology with peer-to-peer networking, and software component architecture with agent paradigm. [...] Agent-based systems are intrinsically peer-to-peer: each agent is a peer that potentially needs to initiate a communication with any other agent as well as it is capable of providing capabilities to the rest of the agents. [...] JADE allows each agent to dynamically discover other agents and to communicate with them according to the peer-to-peer paradigm." (1999, 2003)

From Distributed Object Architecture (DOA) and Service Object-Oriented Architecture (SOOA) to Web Service-Oriented Architecture (WSOA), Web Service Object-Oriented Architecture (WSOOA), Web Service-enabled Service-Oriented Architecture (WSSOA)

DOA vs. SOA vs. WSA vs. WSSOA

Web Services (WS)

"Web services are interoperable and loosely coupled, which go hand in hand to create a powerful but flexible infrastructure for document exchange that can work on all platforms."
"Web services are simply a mechanism for exchanging structured XML documents. [...] Web services should not be confused with distributed object systems."
"Web services require close coupling of applications they integrate. Applications communicate via message exchange requiring strong coupling in terms of reference and time. The communication has to be directed to the web service addressed and the communication must be synchronous."
"Web services therefore use the same [discovered CS (not(?))] brokered [P2P] model as other systems, such as Napster, Jini or CORBA [...]"
"The basic building blocks for using Web services are the service-oriented architecture (SOA) and Internet protocols."
"Service oriented architectures (SOA) describes an approach to building business applications based around web services." But only since the introduction of WS.
WS are like mS, which are only based on Internet and WWW technologies.
"Microsoft coined the term "Web services" in June 2000, when the company introduced Web services as a key component of its .Net initiative, a broad new vision for embracing the Internet in the development, engineering and use of software."
. Net is characterized as SOC and SOP
WS are not DOA, SOA, and mSOA, also no AM and ABS.

REpresentational State Transfer (REST) (2000)

XML-RPC

historically

implication DOS (e.g. RMI) is not WS lightweight

"[...] Semantic Web services [(SWS)] - a core building block of the Semantic Web - have inherited the Web service communication model, which is based on synchronous message exchange [of SOAP-messages], thus being incompatible with the REST architectural model of the Web. Analogously to the conventional Web, truly Web-compliant service communication should, however, be based on persistent publication instead of message passing."
ABos, Tuple Space System (TSS), and our Ontologic Web (OW) do both.

From DOS over Internet OS (around 1995) to Dos and Evoos

JiniOS included in Evoos of us (1999)

os vs. MAS vs. SOA vs. WSSOA, SOC and SOP
os: daemons, services are peers, can be agents
MAS: agents are peers, communication using decentralized, P2P protocol
ABos: daemons are agents are peers
peer agents only means coequal agents, but must not mean Peer-to-Peer Computing (P2PC)
SOA: components, services are peers
SOP: "A service is a contractually defined behavior that can be implemented and provided by any component for use by any component, based solely on the contract. Component models prescribe that programming problems can be seen as independently deployable black boxes that communicate through contracts. The traditional client-server model often lacks well-defined public contracts that are independent of the client or server implementation. [...] In Service-Oriented Programming, components publish and use services in a peer-to-peer manner. In SOP a client is not tied to a particular server. Instead, service providers are interchangeable."
WS: some features of the Actor Model (AM) and the Agent-Based System (ABS), Agent-Oriented Programming (AOP), for example message passing.
WS: WSSOA, SOC, SOP based on component, service, contract, and brokered P2P.

os vs. middleware
Agent-Based os (ABos) vs. middleware, removing MAS middleware with ABos

Agent-Based system (ABS), Multi-Agent System (MAS) vs. WS vs. mS
SOA, WS, WSSOA, SOC and SOP, Cloud 2.0, Cloud 3.0, Cloud-native (Cn) (microService Architecture (mSA), and ServerLess and Function as a Service (FaaS))
Java Jini (July 1998) with Openwings (October 2000), .NET (July 2000)
JXTA (2001)

Howsoever, SOA and Semantic Web Services (SWS), and ABS and WS bring back ontology, Intelligent Agent System (IAS) (e.g. plagiarism and fake Belief-Desire-Intention (BDI) Semantic (World Wide) Web (SWWW) agent engine Nuin), Multi-Agent System (MAS) respectively our Evoos and our OntoBot.

... in addition to Bionics, Cybernetics, and Ontonics.

Enterprise Application Integration (EAI)
DOA, CORBA, Java Jini only foundation, infrastructure for SOA 3.0, SOOA, SOP, SOC,
CORBA focus on Business Process
Java Jini focus on discovery of device, service, etc.

SOA 1.0 ESB, etc. vs. WS, and WSSOA or SOA 2.0 lightweight Internet protocols vs. mSOA, mSA, mS

DOA vs. WS vs. mSOA, mSA, mS
WS are not DOA, DOS
WS are not SOA, can be WSSOA
implication WS are not mSOA

CORBA, Java Jini with Openwings, mS
They went SOA with as much as legally possible of prior art, Dos, Actor Model (AM), Agent-Based System (ABS), Multi-Agent System (MAS), Agent-Oriented Programming (AOP). But they have to put everything into user space and no VMM, VM, P2PVM, osVM, osV or containerization, mVM, osS or container sandbox, etc..
We went Bionics, Cybernetics, Ontonics (BCO)
component-based os, Reflective os, Distributed os, Reflective Distributed os, Kernel-Less os, Agent-Based os, VMM, VM, osVM, osV, AM, ABS, Multi-AS, Holonic AS, Cognitive AS,
Model-Based Autonomous System (MBAS) or ImmoBot, etc.

Service
"A service is a contractually defined behavior that can be implemented and provided by any component for use by any component, based solely on the contract", which is an "interface that contractually defines the syntax and semantics of a single behavior."
"[...] IDL (Interface Definition Language) document that acts as the service contract [...] The IDL document is a precursor of the WSDL (Web Service Description Language) document that provides a formal specification of a web service and its operations."
"An interface description language or interface definition language (IDL) is a generic term for a language that lets a program or object written in one language communicate with another program written in an unknown language. [...]
Software systems [technologies] based on IDLs [an IDL] include [(list points added)]

"An ActiveX control under Windows is a DLL (Dynamic Link Library) with an embedded typelib, which in turn is a compiled IDL file."
An Application Programming Interface (API) is not a service.
architectural elements of Service-Oriented Programming (SOP), Service-Oriented Computing (SOC)

• role of component, agent
• port of component, os

os component, service, daemon, contract
ABos, Dos, agent component, service (layer), DOA, DOS, SOA
ABos strictly separates kernel space services and user space middleware services and applications, component-based os with service layer, SOA in kernel space and middleware, discusses Dos, messaging, DOA, DOS, RPC, CORBA, Interface Definition Language (IDL), BlackBoard System (BBS), Tuple Space System (TSS), Linda System (LS), Open Agent Architecture (OAA), speech act Agent Communication Language (ACL) (e.g. KQML), etc., but not Reflective os (Ros), Intelligent Agent System (IAS) (e.g. Belief-Desire-Intention (BDI)), Model-Based Agent-Based System (MBABS) (e.g. Model-Based Autonomous System (MBAS) or Immobile Robotic System (ImRS or Immobot)), Ultra-Large scale, Massively Distributed System (ULMDS) or Ultra Large Distributed System (ULDS), Internet, WWW scale, Global Brain (GB), Semantic (World Wide) Web (SWWW), Grid Computing (GC or GridC)), Parallel Computing (ParaC), etc.
DOA Java Jini with JavaSpaces could be viewed as part of related MAS with TSS, ABS middleware, ABos service layer, and even ABos itself, so to say Jini OS.

Evoos, Cognitive Agent System (CAS), spirit, reflective Dos, ABos, agent component, service, contract, VMM, VM, osVM, osV, mVM
Apertos (Muse) with Cognac, reflective, Ultra-Large scale, Massively Distributed operating system (ULMDos), Actor Model (AM), Active Object (AO)
Evoos also connects kernel space and user space respectively as reflective system has single space, which is managed in other ways.

features of ABos and Java Jini added for Openwings, .NET
We quote once again an online encyclopedia about the subject microService: "[...] Ultimately this path of research led to the development creation of our Evoos, which includes also the creation of resource-oriented computing (ROC), a generalized computation abstraction in which REST is a special subset. In 2005, during a presentation at the Web Services Edge conference, [a researcher of Hewlett Packard] argued for "REST-services" and stated that "Software components are Micro-Web-Services... Micro-Services are composed using Unix-like pipelines (the Web meets Unix = true loose-coupling). Services can call services (+multiple language run-times [runtimes]). Complex service assemblies are abstracted behind simple URI interfaces. Any service, at any granularity, can be exposed." He described how a well-designed microservices platform "applies the underlying architectural principles of the Web and REST services together with Unix-like scheduling and pipelines to provide radical flexibility and improved simplicity in service-oriented architectures.[12 [Service-Oriented Development on NetKernel- Patterns, Processes & Products to Reduce System Complexity". CloudComputingExpo. [15th of February 2005]]]
[...]"]

Comment
But they have only the Java Runtime Environment (JRE) with the Java Virtual Machine (JVM).
microServices, "Micro Services-Java the Unix way", has recognized deficit and put service as servlet, including web container or servlet container, "well-behaved UNIX service", daemon, or "installed in the same way [as] any other application", executable Java ARchive (JAR) file with any libraries the program uses.
But Java Runtime Environment (JRE) with Java Virtual Machine (JVM) is in user space and mS is not in Java Jini, ABos, etc.
Our Evoos mS substitutes single user space AM and RE with features of Dos kernel space VM and RE, which allows multiple VM, AM, and RE by our os-level Virtualization (osV) or containerization.

Java is a programming language based on an Abstract Machine (AM) implemented at first as the interpreter Java Virtual Machine (JVM), and since the Java Runtime Environment (JRE) {?}1.2 as template interpreter HotSpot JVM, which is the standard JVM since JRE 1.3, and its extension Jini with JavaSpaces based on the Tuple Space System (TSS).
Every supported operating platform has its own JVM.
Java Agent Development Environment (JADE), "The software architecture [for "FIPA-compliant interoperable intelligent multi-Agent System" (MAS)] is based on the coexistence of several Java Virtual Machines (VM) and communication relies on Java RMI (Remote Method Invocation) between different VMs and event signaling within a single VM. Each VM is a basic container of agents that provides a complete run time environment [Runtime Environment (RE)] for agent execution and allows several agents to concurrently execute on the same host." (1999)
The Common Language Runtime (CLR) is the AM with interpreter called Virtual Machine (VM) .NET.

Parallel Virtual Machine (PVM), Message Passing Interface (MPI)
MUltiple Language/Target Integration PLATform FOR Modules (MULTIPLATFORM), integration platform respectively "[distributed] multi-blackboard platform [BlackBoard System (BBS), Tuple Space System (TSS)] with ontology-based messaging" "based on [the Parallel Virtual Machine (]PVM[)]" with "publish/subscribe messaging on top of PVM" (2003)

support of multiple of the same types and different types of Abstract Machine (AM) (e.g. Java Virtual Machine (JVM), Common Language Runtime (CLR), etc.) and Runtime Environment (RE) (e.g. Jave Runtime Environment (JRE), PVM, MPI, etc.) and execution on the same host was not considered at all in relation to Dos and DOA, DOS.

substituting the Runtime Environment (RE) with Abstract Machine (AM) with interpreter respectively Virtual Machine (VM), and Just-In-Time (JIT) compiler of Java, .NET, etc. with os, Dos
problem address space, process, and runtime environment isolation, separation
isolation, separation was a problem and focused consideration at this time

component, service, contract
Microsoft even worked on the os Singularity and Sing#.

We also recall once again that the company Hewlett Packard worked on something with (a processor for) XML and CoolTown related to Nomadic Computing (NC or NomC) and Service-Oriented Programming (SOP) at this time in 2000. Its plagiarisms and fakes of our Resource-Oriented technologies (ROx) (see also Holonic Agent System (HOS)) and Netkernel came years later around 2005 after that dirty trick with XML did not work.
It also shows once again the difference betwen WS and mS, and therefore that Cloud Computing of the second generation (CC 2.0) is based on our Evoos and therefore that Cloud Computing of the third generation (CC 3.0) and Cloud-native technologies (Cnx) are based on our Evoos and our OS.

DOA, DOS vs. Dos
DCE/RPC, MSRPC, ICE, gRPC, WFC, etc.
with osVM, osV or containerization, mVM, container osS or sandbox, etc., is never legal.

Internet Communications Engine (ICE), Windows Communication Foundation (WCF), gRemote Procedure Call (gRPC), etc. come from DOA, DOS, and Dos, but not SOA, ABS, SOP + AOP
Cloud 2.0 - .NET ("Internet OS") - Windows as Dos
Cloud 3.0 - container, control group (cgroup), namespace, Docker, Kubernetes - Linux Dos
Evoos, Dos, ABos, Cloud operating system™ (Cos™ or Cloud OS™)

We quote a slide about Cloud-native technologies (Cnx): "From Virtualization to Cloud Native

Comment
This shows once again the difference between Distributed Object Architecture (DOA) and Distributed Object System (DOS), and Distributed operating system (Dos) and the development from DOA, DOS to Dos.

But none of the prior art has all features alone and in combination, integration, fusion, etc..
"The [Connection Machines [(CMs[)] and the [Parallel Inference Machines (]PIMs[)] were massively parallel computing machines already doing in hardware, what an [Resource Description Framework Virtual Machine (]RDF VM[(] or similar abstract machine does in software."
DOA, DOS, RPC, RMI, etc.
SOA, etc.
SW framework DCE
DOA, DOS framework, CORBA, DCOM, Java Jini, etc.

Ultra-Large scale, Massively Distributed System (ULMDS) or Ultra Large Distributed System (ULDS) on the basis of and for the use with massively distributed, loosely coupled resources, objects, etc.

os components, services
Distributed operating system (Dos) can also be designed as an 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., Internet and WWW scale, but lack of subsymbolic system and symbolic system only as ABos
PVM, MPI, etc. broadcasting, multicasting message passing,

Internet, WWW, Dos
ABS, MAS
Ultra-Large scale, Massively Distributed Agent-Based System (ULMDABS)

Dos, ULDS, ULMDos, Internet and WWW scale, centralized vs. hybrid respectively discovered CS, brokered P2P vs. decentralized
ABS, middleware manages brokered P2P
ABos, os manages brokered P2P

activities in the field of Dos are concerned with the design of a complete Dos

VMM, VM, osVM, osV, mVM, etc.
SOA no hardware virtualization and no os-level Virtualization (osV)
ABos no hardware virtualization respectively Virtual Machine Monitor (VMM) or hypervisior, and Virtual Machine (VM) and no os-level Virtualization (osV)
maybe already in 1999 and not only in 2000 jails in relation to Virtual Private Server (VPS), also known as server virtualization, "virtual servers share the underlying physical hardware with other VPS", no os-level Virtualization (osV), no SOA, no ABS,
All lack of VMM, VM, osVM, osV or containerization, mVM, osS or sandbox, etc., more subsymbolic system, etc.

Actor Model (AM), message passing
ABS based on AM, message passing, Distributed Shared Memory (DSM), etc.
BDI architecture, symbolic system
subsumption architecture, subsymbolic system, Robotic System (RS)
Model-Based Autonomous System or Immobile Robotic System (ImRS or Immobot), which already is an Agent-Based System (ABS), which can also be designed as a Massively Distributed Agent-Based System (MDABS) on the basis of and for the use with massively distributed and highly coupled resources, objects, etc., integrated (unified and hybrid) subsymbolic and symbolic system, but lack of ontology, LM, etc.
MAS can be designed as an Ultra-Large scale, Massively Distributed Agent-Based System (ULMDABS)
Java ABS, Java-based Agent Framework for MultiAgent Systems (JAFMAS), coherent MAS, broadcasting, multicasting message passing, federation, BlackBoard System (BBS), linguistic layer, speech act Agent Communication Language (ACL) (e.g. KQML), social model, serverless DS P2P, M2M

ABos, Dos, DOA, DOS, (SOA), components, services, service layer, message passing, BlackBoard System (BBS), etc., but lack of Tuple Space System (TSS), subsymbolic system, Global Brain (GB), Grid Computing (GC or GridC), etc.

Knowledge Management, SWWW, etc.
Global Brain (GB, symbolic system, predecessor of SWWW, including predecessor of Grid Computing

also interesting
COM to DCOM and in os Windows
DOA with more of Dos, but not Dos

RPC, RMI is Client-Server (CS)
PVM, MPI broadcasting, multicasting message passing
PVM, MPI were not considered at all in relation to Dos and DOA, DOS

Grid Computing (GC or GridC) and WS
GC and WS (2001) (e.g. Open Grid Service Architecture (OGSA))
"The Anatomy of the Grid: Enabling Scalable Virtual Organization (VO)" (2001), highly suspicious or even partial plagiarism similar to JXTA peer groups (2001)
"The Physiology of the Grid: An Open Grid Services Architecture for Distributed Systems Integration" (2002), highly suspicious or even partial plagiarism

We also note that informations gathered by observation of activities and documented in The Proposal have been taken as sources of inspiration and blueprints for SOP, SOC, and also Cloud, Edge, and Fog Computing (CEFC) in general and Openwings, .NET, etc. in particular, and obviously for much more.

In this context, no genre exists in case of Service-Oriented Architecture of the second generation (SOA 2.0), Service-Oriented Architecture of the third generation (SOA 3.0), Cloud Computing of the second generation (CC 2.0), Cloud Computing of the third generation 3.0, Cloud-native technologies (Cnx), etc., because

and therefore no osVM, no P2PVM, no osV respectively containerization, no mVM, no osS respectively container sandbox, no container orchestration, no mS, etc. is required.
But we also argue about cybernetic reflection, ontological argument, belief system, etc..

Eventually, the separation trick only led to multiple copyright infringements and their proof.

19.March.2025

11:40, 12:13 and 13:14 UTC+1
Gap between 7.5 tn USD and 26 tn USD too large

The companies Microsoft, Alphabet (Google), and Amazon have a market capitalization of around 9 trillion U.S. Dollar.
Accordingly, the apportioned damage compensations would be around 2.7 + 2.4 + 2.4 = 7.5 trillion U.S. Dollar.
The rest of so-called big tech, such as the companies Nvidia, Apple, and Meta (Facebook), and also Oracle, Salesforce, Hewlett Packard Enterprise, SAP, Qualcomm, Broadcom, etc., has a market capitalization of simply estimated at 14 trillion U.S. Dollar.
Accordingly, the apportioned damage compensations would be around 3 + 2.4 + 1.5 + ... = 10 trillion U.S. Dollar.
The damages caused by the rest of big biz, small biz, et al has been simply estimated at around 7 trillion U.S. Dollar.

Get 26 trillion U.S. Dollar together in North America and Europe, which reflects the result of the approach of our Society for Ontological Performance and Reproduction (SOPR) and suggests the realization respectively implementation of it, which is based on the

regarding the

For our companies, subsidiaries, and Joint Ventures (JVs), in which our main company holds the majority of company shares, internal collection, internal accounting, and internal offsetting of royalties applies.

Similarly in Asia (Japan, South Korea, India, P.R.China, etc.).

In general, the 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) demand neutrality, equality, etc. and therefore a standard approach, which applies for every entity concerned.

15:00 UTC+1
Style of Speed Further steps

We have spent some days with the specification of our next fun makers and made some quick and dirty doodles.

The first specification is the standard Blu Okeanos with roof, engine frame, wing, and upper and lower exterior parts, but without door fin in shiny carbon (see for example AKMOTP in the configurator) and without custom rims.

© :I, :I, and Style of Speed

The second specification is our SoS original and unqiue, special two-colour scheme Bicolore, here standard Nero Helene (see for example AKMSUO and AKM16K) and Blu Notte (see for example AKMTIQ) with exterior parts in high-gloss paint, engine grille in colour-matched (silver) paint, and Brixton PF10 Duo (2 piece) wheels in polished finish, reminiscent to the Bugatti EB 18/4 Veyron and its conversion to the EB 16/4 Veyron.


© :I, :I, and Style of Speed

More Style, More Speed, More Fun™

And we are also working on the Super Veloce (SV) or Super Elemento (SE) (tail is already very nice), but we will not show our dirty doodle.

And we are also working on the engine. Factory drivetrain has 1015 hp with electric engines, SoS basis has 2000 hp, and we add the second generation of something, which is phenomenal with

Eventually, this technology makes its overall environmental footprint better than an electric car.

We guess it will be quite fast, beyond 500.

By the way:

20.March.2025

10:31 UTC+1
Digital Market Act (DMA) no carte blanche

We quote and translate a report: "[...]
According to an initial assessment by the European Commission, Google's parent company Alphabet is in breach of EU digital rules. The online giant is not making it possible enough to direct consumers to offers outside of its own app stores. Alphabet is also accused of violating the guidelines in the classic Google search. In its preliminary assessment, the Commission found that Alphabet favors its own services, for example for shopping or hotel bookings. The internet company now faces severe penalties if it does not make changes."

Comment
So, when is a large company not in breach with said digital rules?
Somehow, we have the impression that the Digital Markets Act (DMA) is a hidden attempt to break up certain companies, a carte blanche for capricious market organization, and a fever dream of bureaucrats and control freaks.

And which changes are required and are truly legal?

Our Society for Ontological Performance and Reproduction (SOPR) will continue its observation of the situation and take actions iin case of any interference with and also obstruction, undermining and harm of the exclusive rights and properties of C.S. and our corporation.

13:01 UTC+1
Nobody is scrambling in relation to Bionics

Just sign, pay, comply, specifically pay damages, the higher of ..., and royalties 7% (HW, Ontoscope Components (OsC) (e.g. devices, machines, vehicles, robots)), 17% (GC, CC, SC, DC HW for Ontoverse (Ov) and New Reality (NR), Bionics, Cybernetics, Ontonics (BCO)), and 27% (OntoAppsOntoServices (OAOS), OS Components (OSC)) depending of this and that, and get full access to every kind of Bionics (e.g. Artificial Intelligence (AI), Machine Language (ML), Computational Intelligence (CI), Artificial Neural Network (ANN), Computer Vision (CV), Computer Audition (CA), Agent-Based System (ABS), MAS, CAS, etc.).

It is just our coherent Ontologic Model (OM), our Ontologic roBot (OB, OntoBot), virtual assistant, our Foundational Model (FM), Foundation Model (FM), General Purpose Language Model (GPLM), Large Language Model (LLM), Reasoning Language Model (RLM), Conversational Artificial Intelligence (CAI or ConAI), (Information) Retrieval Augmented Generation (RAG), agentic AI (what a $#!++y designation for our OntoBot, Agent-Based System (ABS) is subfield of AI), and whatsowever it is wrongly and illegally called by the lying press and other fraudulent and even serious criminal entities.

And it is just our Ontoscope (Os), Android Smartphone, Apple iPhone, Microsoft CoPilot+ PC, and whatsoever it is branded by the marketing divisions without authorization.

And as Joint Venture Partner (JVP) and even business division, subsidiary, and brand of our corporation much more access is granted.

This is only the beginning.

Welcome to the 21st Century.
Welcome to the New Reality (NR).
Welcome to the Ontoverse (Ov).
Welcome to the OntoLand (OL).
Welcome to the New World Order (NWO).
Welcome back to the reality.

21.March.2025

09:12 UTC+1
Further steps

We are still working through the past in relation to

because we

See also the

Obivously, a change or transition happened around 1998 and the following years, which is related with our activities, specifically the creation of our Evolutionary operating system (Evoos).
Our impressions were right, for example in relation to the fields of

but some (few) claims were not correct.
The new insights will be incorporated in our further actions and corrected on this website of OntomaX as part of the ongoing cleanup.

Indeed, we concluded rather quickly that Java Jini and XML-RPC are based on our activities, because it was exactly what we were creating around 1997 and 1998, and thus is also the reason why we belong to the very few individuals, who directly understood what they were and were on fire.
Our activities also resulted in those highly suspicious developments of the

But honestly, we did not know how much of

was also based on our activities at that time, because we thought that it all started earlier around 1996 and 1997, which was not the case.
And exactly at this point the things are becoming very interesting. For example, one question is how much of the Internet os and the CC 2.0 is also part of our Evoos.

"Web services meet immediate technology needs, while the Semantic Web has the potential for future exponential growth." "Semantic Web Enabled Web Services (SWWS) will transform the Web from a static collection of information into a distributed device of computation on the basis of Semantic Web technology making content within the World Wide Web machine-processable and machine-interpretable."
Now are coming rationalities, symbols, semantics, ontologies, and logics, or simply said ontologics.

Howsoever,

are Evoos, because none of said prior art even mentions HardWare Virtualization (HWV) respectively Virtual Machine Monitor (VMM) or hypervisor, Virtual Machine (VM), etc..
Note that the Java Runtime Environment (JRE) includes the Java Virtual Machine (JVM), which is an Abstract Machine (AM) and Interpreted Runtime Environment (IRE) and since JRE version 1.2 a Just-In-Time (JIT) compiler, which is executed in user space like the alternative compiled machine code, but not kernel space, and Evoos has both kinds of VM respectively VM and AM.
See the very carefully selected, titled, and formulated chapters

of The Proposal.
The

which eventually resutls in or includes the

It's not a trick. It's Ontologics. Got it? :)

The puzzle is close to completion, which will lead to the next solution: Sign, pay, comply. :)

Most potentially, we will summarize or merge the

as a Clarification.

26.March.2025

00:00 and 12:02 UTC+1
SOPR submits basis for legal certainty

*** Work in progress ***
Our Society for Ontological Performance and Reproduction (SOPR) concluded and would like to submit a foundation regarding the establishment of legal certainty for entities concerned, specifically in relation to the

which should and could allow others and us to live with and to go on in harmony.

As we already said from time to time, the white, yellow, or red line can always be drawn so that only some details are left for negotiation, although eventually this will not change anything anymore.

Ultimately, the fields of

were initially about the fields of

• Business Architecture (BA),
  • Business Process (BP),
  • etc.,
• Information System Architecture (ISA),
  • Application Architecture (see also SOA), and
  • Enterprise Application Integration (EAI),
  • Data Architecture,
• Technology Architecture,

but not about the fields of

Furthermore, the fields of

had no

Maybe in 1999, operating system jails were already utilized for file and network access restriction for shared hosting environment, but only "partition [of] the operating system environment, while maintaining the simplicity of the UNIX "root" model" (see the document titled "Jails: Confining the omnipotent root" and publicated in March 2000) and therefore only extended chroot, and user-level sandbox or operating system-level Compartment (osC) or compartmentalization, but

on the basis of the fields listed above.
These fields also had no

Moreover, the fields of

had no

In addition, parts of our coherent Ontologic Model (OM), such as

and also combinations, integrations, etc. with our OM, such as

show what belongs to prior art and other legal works of others, and works of art, performances, and achievements of us.

In sum,

as all discussed in the past in relation to our Evolutionary operating system (Evoos) and our Ontologic System (OS).
A virtually complete and continously updated list will be publicized as part of the Terms of Service (ToS) with its License Model (LM) of our SOPR.

We also recall that "the discussion about commonplace elements and common building blocks has been done as well, even from different points of view, including the doctrines of

and it always ended in the

of C.S.,
as well as

Eventually, this applies in case of the fields and matters listed above and due to the reason that others have alternatives available, and therefore

This (proposed) white, yellow, or red line is also drawn in correspondance with the

00:00 and 12:02 UTC+1
SOPR considering variant of CVA procedure

Another variant of the Company Voluntary Arrangement (CVA) procedure regarding the

is also being considered, that should avoid filing of an official, formal insolvency proceedings.

This procedure has as basic steps the

For example, in case of a ratio of company shares, which assigns 90% to us and 10% to an old company, the share price for the new company is 10 times higher for the same return, or the share price is the same for 1/10th of the return. Or something like that.
An implication is that the market capitalization of the new company would be 10 times higher than the market capitalization of the old company. :D

See also the notes

and the other publications cited therein.

27.March.2025

16:40 UTC+1
Boeing F-47

In relation to the plan and design of the air superiority sixth-generation fighter aircraft of the U.S.American Next Generation Air Dominance (NGAD) program we would like to share the informations ... Top Secret - Only for Partners.
We have already made some adaptions to ... Top Secret - Only for Partners.
But we already planned a Joint Venture (JV) of the U.S.America, Canada, the U.K., the European Union, Australia, Japan, and other friendly entities, which will increase overall harmony, continuity, stability, and prosperity, and also economic win-win, such as saving 1 or more trillions of taxpayers' money. They all want the best, which is our stuff. :)

28.March.2025

16:04 UTC+1
Comment of the Day

"Intellectual Property=Investment==Intellektuelles Eigentum=Investition", [C.S., Today]
In short: IP=I

See also the

20:04 and 20:45 UTC+1
Matters of digital version, clone, twin, identity of human not so easy

A digital version or clone could be viewed as an avatar in a certain context.
But a digital twin of a human is not an avatar related to the field of Humanistic Computing (HC), which is Wearable Computing (WearComp) and Mediated Reality (MedR) (e.g. Augmented Reality (AR), Virtual Reality (VR), Mixed Reality (MR)), and therefore always a cybernetical reflection, portrait, etc. in the legal scope of ... the Ontoverse (Ov) and New Reality (NR), including our eXtended Mixed Reality (XMR) or simply eXtended Reality (XR).

Another legal issue is our exclusive and mandatory Marketplace for Everything (MfE), which is the place and agency, where individuals can commercially exploit their raw signals and data, informations, personal data or Personally Identifiable Informations (PIIs), knowledge bases, belief bases, models, algorithms, etc.. There is no direct path between individuals and companies.

Finally, we would like to recall that only our Society for Ontological Performance and Reproduction (SOPR) is able to product said rights and properties for various artistical, societal, legal, technical, and economical reasons.

29.March.2025

Comment of the Day

"Court decisions stand. Whether one particular person chooses to abide by them or not, it doesn't change the foundation that it's still a court order that someone will respect at some point. That's the faith that I have in our system.", [Justice Sonia Sotomayor, U.S.American Supreme Court, 11th of February 2025]

04:18, 09:01, 11:48, and 18:49 UTC+1
Musk still in LaLaLand and xAI blacklisted

That Ponzi manoeuvre will not work. The company X.AI Corporation will be dissected again into the prior core business X (Twitter) and the illegal business X.AI Corporation, when going public and the majority of the shares of xAI will have to be handed over to our Society for Ontological Performance and Reproduction (SOPR), because xAI is unable to pay the damage compensations, the higher of apportioned compensation, profit, and value.
How much X (Twitter) and X.AI Corporation are truly worth will be seen by the analysis on the basis of standard industry-proven examination and assessment methods. And this magic increase in value will be factored in in a truly reasonable way, which is based on facts and not on fantasies. X.Twitter still -12 billion U.S. Dollar (debt) over 8.8 billion U.S. Dollar (20% of 44 billion U.S. Dollar) to 13.2 billion U.S. Dollar (30% of 44 billion U.S. Dollar) and not 12+33 billion U.S. Dollar (paid by xAI) and xAI 1 U.S. Dollar and not 75 billion U.S. Dollar, because they do not get the allowance and license for the performance and reproduction of certain parts of our Ontologic System (OS) from our SOPR, exactly like the case Meta (Facebook) and Meta.AI, Snapchat (Snap) and My AI, ByteDance (TikTok) and Symphony Assistant, etc., etc., etc..
If the increase in value is 80 or 92 billion U.S. Dollar, then the ratio is 1:6.6 or 1:7.6 for us. X.AI Corporation 99.999999% for us like OpenAI, Anthropic, and Co..
It is that easy.

Several serious question arise for example for certain lawyers and others:

Note that this case is different to the same dirty trick applied some years ago in case of Tesla Motors and SolarCity (Tesla Energy) due to the rights and properties of C.S. and our corporation in case of X.AI Corporation, specifically the moral rights respectively Lanham (Trademark) rights for exclusive exploitation (e.g. commercialization (e.g. monetization)).
Furthermore, that all those old and new companies are deliberately trying to make an irreparable damage seems not to be very clever, specifically if one is already counted.
We only note

The courts already gained experiences, acquired expertise, and set precedents. And we are already preparing legal actions for this Trump 2.0 era and the post-Trump era, So do not expect a pardon or other dirty trick.
This legal matter has been discussed completely and ruled fundamentally over the last centrury at the courts.

In cases of all social media platforms we simply say

• transformative, generative, and creative Bionics,
• Bridge from Natural Intelligence (NI) to Artificial Intelligence (AI) (Bridge from NI to AI), and
• prompt engineering, forming, shaping, configuring respectively cognitive processing, educating, teaching, learning, etc.,

• Conversational Artificial Intelligence (CAI or ConAI), and
• (Information) Retrieval Augmented Generation (RAG),

The rights and properties of C.S. and our corporation will not be violated anymore, specifically not by trading our corporation at the stock markets without authorization by us.

Sign, pay, comply.

See also the notes

and the other publications cited therein.

31.March.2025

16:00 UTC+2
Clarification

*** Work in progress - some minor corrections ***

And we got the next topic, which requires some clarifying discussion and is about the fields of

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

• Single Sign-On (SSO),
• Decentralized IDentity and Access Management System (DIDAMS or DecIDAMS)
  • Decentralized Digital IDentity (DDID) with Decentralized IDentifier (DID or DecID),
  • Federated IDentity and Access Management System (FIDAMS)
  • Distributed IDentity and Access Management System (DIDAMS or DisIDAMS)
    • Distributed IDentity (DID or DisID) and
    • OpenID,

• federated social networking (Peer-to-Peer (P2P) or Server-to-Server (S2S) network of Client-Server (CS) networks)
  • Fediverse,

  and

• distributed social networking (P2P network),

• OpenMicroBlogging,
• OStatus (successor of OpenMicroBlogging),
• pump.io and ActivityPump (successor of OStatus),
• ActivityPub (update of ActivityPump), and
• Authenticated Transfer Protocol (AT Protocol),

We quote an online encyclopedia about the subject OpenID: "OpenID is an open standard and decentralized authentication protocol promoted by the non-profit OpenID Foundation. It allows users to be authenticated by co-operating sites (known as relying parties, or RP) using a third-party identity provider (IDP) service, eliminating the need for webmasters to provide their own ad hoc login systems, and allowing users to log in to multiple unrelated websites without having to have a separate identity and password for each.[1] Users create accounts by selecting an OpenID identity provider,[1] and then use those accounts to sign on to any website that accepts OpenID authentication. Several large organizations either issue or accept OpenIDs on their websites.[2]
[...]
The final version of OpenID is OpenID 2.0, finalized and published in December 2007.[5] The term OpenID may also refer to an identifier as specified in the OpenID standard; these identifiers take the form of a unique Uniform Resource Identifier (URI), and are managed by some "OpenID provider" that handles authentication.[1]

[...]

History
The original OpenID authentication protocol was developed in May 2005[44 [Distributed Identity: Yadis. [16th of May 2005]]] by Brad Fitzpatrick[...].[45] Initially referred to as Yadis (an acronym for "Yet another distributed identity system"),[46] it was named OpenID after the openid.net domain name was given [...] to use for the project.[47] [...]

[...]"

Comment
Indeed, the start of OpenID on the 16th of May 2005, initially referred to as Yet another distributed identity system (Yadis), and also circumscribed as a form of federated identity was before the publication of our Ontologic System (OS).
But in fact,

We quote an online encyclopedia about the subject Decentralized IDentifier (DID or DecID): "A decentralized identifier (DID) is a type of globally unique identifier that enables an entity to be identified in a manner that is verifiable, persistent (as long as the DID controller desires), and does not require the use of a centralized registry.[1] DIDs enable a new model of decentralized digital identity that is often referred to as a self-sovereign identity.[2] They are an important component of decentralized web applications.

[...]

Usage of DIDs
A DID identifies any subject (e.g., a person, organization, thing, data model, abstract entity, etc.) that the controller of the DID decides that it identifies. DIDs are designed to enable the controller of a DID to prove control over it and to be implemented independently of any centralized registry, identity provider, or certificate authority. DIDs are URIs that associate a DID subject with a DID document.[4] Each DID document can express cryptographic material, verification methods, and service endpoints to enable trusted interactions associated with the DID subject. A DID document might contain additional semantics about the subject that it identifies. A DID document might also contain the DID subject itself (e.g. a data model).[5][1]
National efforts include the European Digital Identity (EUDI) Wallet [(EDIW)] as a part of [electronic IDentification, Authentication and trust Services of the second generation (]eIDAS 2.0[)] in the European Union,[6 [SSI advocates welcome EU digital wallet, IOTA sees opportunity. [8th of March 2024]]] and China Real-Name Decentralized Identifier System (China RealDID) under China's Ministry of Public Security.[7 [China's project to verify real-name digital ID leans into national blockchain ambitions. [13th of December 2023]]] The [Authenticated Transfer (]AT[)] Protocol and applications powered by the protocol such as Bluesky use DIDs for their identity system in order to give users full control over their identity, including where their data is stored. The protocol uses its own DID method, [...].

Standardization efforts
The W3C DID Working Group[8] developed a specification for decentralized identifiers to standardize the core architecture, data model, and representation of DIDs.
The W3C approved the DID 1.0 specification as a W3C Recommendation on July 19, 2022.[1]
The Decentralized Identity Foundation (DIF) published a Dynamic Traveler Profile Generation Specification in June 2023, for use cases in the travel industry. [9]"

Comment
While the so-called immutable Decentralized IDentifier (DID) is a utilization of the blockchain technique, virtually all of its integrations are copyright infringements regarding the features of our Ontologic System (OS)

• Universal self-awareness listed in the Feature-List Caliber/Calibre (8th of June 2013)

integrated by the Ontologic System Architecture (OSA).
Note that we use the term operating system (os) in the artistical context of

of C.S.,
and in the legal and technological contexts of

The copyright does not allow cherry picking, which means a showing a causal link with only a part of the original and unique expression of idea is sufficient to prove an infringement of the copyright, and the moral right respectively Lanham (trademark) right does not allow interferring with, and also obstructing, undermining, and harming the exclusive exploitation.

Indeed, the first utilization of a blockchain to store immutable legal documents, including IDentities (IDs), was described before the publication of our Ontologic System (OS).
But in fact, no Distributed Object Architecture (DOA), no Service-Oriented Architecture (SOA), no Web Service Architecture (WSA), no microService Architecture (mSA), and also {correction required}no smart contract transaction protocol, no Peer-to-Peer Virtual Machine (P2PVM), no blockchain technique, and no Distributed Ledger Technology (DLT) (see the Clarification of the 23rd of December 2024), no Semantic (World Wide) Web (SWWW) technologies, etc., etc., etc. in contrast to our OS with its Ontologic IDentity (OID or OntoID) and Decentralized IDentity (DID or DecID) also refered as onto#.

We quote an online encyclopedia about the subject Activity Streams (format): "Activity Streams is an open format specification for activity stream protocols, which are used to syndicate activities taken in social web applications and services, similar to those in [Meta.]Facebook's, Instagram's, and [X.]Twitter's.[1 [Facebook opens activity streams; offers API to developers. [28th of April 2009]]]
The standard provides a general way to represent activities. For instance, the sentence "Jack added Hawaii to his list of places to visit" would be represented in ActivityStreams as actor:jack, verb:add, object:Hawaii, target:placestovisit.
Implementors of the Activity Streams draft include [...] Pump.io.
[...] In addition there is a trend of SOA (service-oriented architecture) where third parties power this type of functionality. [citation needed]
GeoSPARQL provides OWL and RDFS alignments to the Activity Streams vocabulary.[2 [[Open Geospatial Consortium (]OGC[)] GeoSPARQL - A Geographic Query Language for RDF Data. [29th of Janaury 2024]]]

[Textbox: [...] Type of format Web syndication [] Extended from [JavaScript Object Notation for Linked Data (]JSON-LD[)]

[...]

See also

Comment
JavaScript Object Notation for Linked Data (JSON-LD) "is a serialization of Resource Description Framework (RDF) models in JSON" and later "is a method of encoding linked data using JSON".
"Extended from JSON-LD" means that the Activitiy Streams format specification has been based on Semantic (World Wide) Web (SWWW) standards and technologies only after around July 2010.

The example "Jack added Hawaii to his list of places to visit" would be represented in ActivityStreams as actor:jack, verb:add, object:Hawaii, target:placestovisit" was only added on the 11th of February 2016 and shows that Activity Streams has also been based on the Web Ontology Language (OWL) only after our

This also matches with the fact that the information about the integration with "GeoSPARQL provides OWL and RDFS" was only added on the 30th of August 2024.
We already explained the following in the section Ontoverse [Virtual land] of the issue SOPR #33h of the 5th of December 2021: "Like the real IDentity (rID) has become a digital IDentity (dID), every real land has become a digital land and every real address has become a digital address."
For sure, the latter has legal consequences in relation to ActivityPub and other things in this field of decentralized social networking, and also social media platforms. See also the quote and comment about the other partial plagiarism and fake called Digital IDentity (DID).

The connection with the field of Service-Oriented Architecture (SOA) was only added on the 30th of May 2014. See also the discussion about Web Service (WS) vs. microService (mS) in the comment to the quote about the AT-protocol below.

Indeed, the document titled "Weaving a Distributed, Semantic Social Network for Mobile Users" was publicized in 2011. But a closer look at its list of references shows, that it is also a partial plagiarism and fake of the related part of our Ontologic System (OS).

Obviously, essential parts of our Ontologic System (OS) with its

have been copied without authorization.
Therefore, ActivityStreams is a blatant copyright infringement.

We also have Channel Computing, which includes activity streaming.

We quote an online encyclopedia about the subject pump.io and ActivityPump: "pump.io is a software package containing a social networking service and communication protocol that can be used as a federated social network.[2] [...] it is a follow-up to his previous microblogging software StatusNet (later merged into GNU social) and its OStatus protocol. It is designed to be more lightweight and usable for general activity streams instead of the predecessor's focus on microblogging timelines, with its goal being to achieve "most of what people want from a social network".[4]
Development of the software started in September 2011,[5] with an initial version being released on October 3, 2012. identi.ca, the largest StatusNet instance at the time (which was also ran by Prodromou), converted to pump.io in June 2013.[6]
While never becoming as popular as its predecessor, the ActivityPump protocol that was designed for it was later used as a template for the creation and standardization of the ActivityPub standard, and development of pump.io has since been discontinued, with the latest version of the engine being released in 2020 and further development concluding by 2022.[7]

Technology
Pump.io is written in Node.js and uses Activity Streams as the format for commands and to transfer data via a simple REST inbox API.[6] The software package also uses a NoSQL database such as MongoDB or Redis, and requires GraphicsMagick for uploading media.
Pump.io can easily be run on hardware with less resources, such as a Raspberry Pi or any other single-board computer. It can be used either with the included Web UI, or other clients via its API.
As a federated social network, pump.io is not tied to a single site. Users across servers can subscribe to and communicate with each other, and if one or more individual nodes go offline the rest of the network remains intact.

ActivityPump
ActivityPump is the protocol used by pump.io to allow for federation of user content between different pump.io instances. Compared to OStatus, its microblogging-oriented predecessor, ActivityPump uses the Activity Streams format and its vocabulary to allow for more general interactions between users, as well as to make development of alternative ActivityPump-based social networks easier for software developers, who were forced to operate within the limits of OStatus and its core technologies.

[...]"

Comment
ActivityStreams is a copyright infringement (see the related quote and comment above).
Pump.io and ActivityPump even added more features of our Ontologic System (OS), such as the essential parts of our Ontologic File System (OntoFS) (e.g. non-Structured Query Language (SQL) (NoSQL)).
The continued following of the main bad actor resulted in a blatant copyright infringement.

See also the quotes and comments about ActivityPub and Fediverse below.

We quote an online encyclopedia about the subject ActivityPub: "ActivityPub is a protocol and open standard for decentralized social networking. It provides a client-to-server (C2S) API for creating and modifying content, as well as a federated server-to-server (S2S) protocol for delivering notifications and content to other servers.[2] ActivityPub has become the main standard used in the fediverse, a popular network used for social networking that consists of software such as Mastodon, Pixelfed and PeerTube.[3]
ActivityPub is considered to be an update to the ActivityPump protocol used in pump.io [...]
[...]

Design
ActivityPub uses the ActivityStreams 2.0 format for building its content, which itself uses JSON-LD. [...]

[...]"

Comment
ActivityStreams is a copyright infringement (see the related quote and comment above).
The continued following of the very well-known main bad actor resulted in a blatant copyright infringement.

See also the quotes and comments about pump.io and ActivityPump above and Fediverse below.

We quote an online encyclopedia about the subject Fediverse: "The Fediverse (commonly shortened to fedi)[4][5][6] is a collection of social networking services that can communicate with each other (formally known as federation) using a common protocol. Users of different websites can send and receive status updates, multimedia files and other data across the network. The term Fediverse is a portmanteau of federation and universe.[7]
The majority of Fediverse platforms [...] create connections between servers using the ActivityPub protocol. Some software still supports older federation protocols as well, such as OStatus, the Diaspora protocol and Zot. Diaspora* is the only actively developed software project classified under the original definition of Fediverse that does not support ActivityPub.[8][9]

Design
While a traditional social networking service will host all its content on servers managed by the owner of the website, the decentralized structure of the Fediverse allows any individual or organization to host a social platform using their own servers (referred to as an "instance").
Every instance is independent, and can set its own rules and expectations. Even so, much like how users of one email service such as Gmail can still send emails to users of another service such as Outlook, users may still view content and interact with users on any other instance in the Fediverse. A user on one Mastodon instance, for example, may still view and interact with posts made by a user on a different Mastodon instance.[10]
Instances hosted by different social networking services may communicate with one another as well. [...]

History
Historical protocols
The concept and the functionality of the Fediverse has existed before the ActivityPub protocol and the term itself. One of the first projects that included support for a decentralized social networking service was Laconica, a microblogging platform which implemented the OpenMicroBlogging protocol for communicating between different installations of the software. The software was later renamed to StatusNet in 2009,[17] before being merged into the GNU social project in 2013 along with Free Social, with the two latter servers being a fork of StatusNet.[18][19]
Over time, the limitations of the OpenMicroBlogging protocol became more apparent, being designed as a one-way text messaging system.[20] To replace the aging protocol, OStatus was devised as an open standard for microblogging, combining various other technologies like Salmon, Atom, WebSub and ActivityStreams into a single protocol used for communicating between instances. StatusNet first implemented the OStatus protocol on March 3, 2010, with version 0.9.0, and OStatus quickly became the most popular federated protocol in usage.
Around the same time as OStatus was gaining popularity, the diaspora* social network was formed, using its own federated protocol. To illustrate the differences between the two protocols, the terms of the Fediverse and the federation began to enter common usage, mainly after 2017. The term "the Fediverse" was used to describe the network formed by software using the OStatus protocol, such as GNU Social, Mastodon, and Friendica, in contrast to the competing diaspora* protocol under "the federation".[21]

ActivityPub
In December 2012, the flagship StatusNet instance at the time, identi.ca, transitioned away to a new software named pump.io, with a new federation protocol to replace OStatus. The new protocol was designed to be useful for general activity streams and not just status updates, and replaced many of OStatus' external dependencies with JSON-LD and a REST API for its messaging and inbox systems, as well as making more use of ActivityStreams. While not as utilized as its OStatus predecessor, it would end up becoming influential in the development of the ActivityPub standard.
[...]

Alternatives
While the Fediverse has traditionally been the network most commonly referred to and used as an example regarding the subject of decentralized social networks, alternatives to it and the accompanying ActivityPub have been developed and deployed. A major protocol in competition with the Fediverse is the AT Protocol, which powers the Bluesky social network and has formed its own separate network dubbed by developers as the Atmosphere,[59] while smaller competitors [...] have become popular [...].[60] These protocols have used ActivityPub in comparisons to their own architecture, as these newer protocols use a different federation model based on publishing content to relays for distribution rather than ActivityPub's server-centric model.[61][62] Despite their differences, software exists that permit the bridging of user content between these protocols, including "double-bridges" that span multiple protocols for the purpose of distributing the same content.[63][64]

[...]"]

Comment
ActivityStreams is a copyright infringement (see the related quote and comment above).

See also the quotes and comments about ActivityPub, and pump.io and ActivityPump above.

We quote an online encyclopedia about the subject Authenticated Transfer Protocol: "The AT Protocol (Authenticated Transfer Protocol, pronounced "@ protocol" and commonly shortened to ATProto)[1][2] is a protocol and open standard for distributed social networking services.[3] It is under development by Bluesky Social PBC, a public benefit corporation originally created as an independent research group within Twitter to investigate the possibility of decentralizing the service.[4]
The AT Protocol aims to address perceived issues with other decentralized protocols, such as user experience, platform interoperability, discoverability, network scalability, and portability of user data and social graphs.[3] It employs a modular microservice architecture and a federated, server-agnostic user identity to enable movement between protocol services, with the goal of providing an integrated online experience.[5] Platforms can access and serve any user content within the network by fetching content formatted as predefined data schemas from federated network-wide data streams.[6][7]
The AT Protocol powers the Bluesky social network, which was created as a proof of concept for the protocol, and is the main service in an ecosystem of platforms and services built on the AT Protocol referred to as the ATmosphere.[8][9][10] As of 2024, Bluesky Social has pledged to transfer the protocol's development to a standards body such as the Internet Engineering Task Force (IETF) in the near future.[11][12]

Design
The AT Protocol is designed to facilitate the creation of federated identities, so that users can retain, manage, and customize one online identity across multiple platforms and services. Bluesky Social describes the protocol as being "modeled after the open web".[5]
Compared to other protocols for social networking such as ActivityPub, where implementations are typically designed as a monolithic server that hosts both user data and the application, it splits up these elements into smaller microservices, which can be used as needed.[13][failed verification]
AT Protocol clients and services interoperate through an HTTP API called XRPC that primarily uses JSON for data serialization.[14] Additionally, all data within the protocol that must be authenticated, referenced, or stored is encoded in [Concise Binary Object Representation (]CBOR[)].[15]

User identity
The AT Protocol utilizes a dual identifier system: a mutable handle, in the form of a domain name, and an immutable decentralized identifier (DID). A handle serves as a verifiable user identifier. Verification is by either of two equivalent methods proving control of the domain name: Either a DNS query of a resource record with the same name as the handle, or a request for a text file from a Web service with the same name. DIDs resolve to DID documents, which contain references to key user metadata, such as the user's handle, public keys, and data repository.[16]
[...]"

Comment
The first version of the quoted webpage was created on the 31st of July 2024.

We also note that a relay node belongs to the field of decentralized networking, specifically distributed networking respectively Peer-to-Peer Computing (P2PC) or networking.

A Web Service Architecture (WSA)

A microService Architecture (mSA)

In this way, various WS and mS of a Service-Oriented Architecture (SOA) can interoperate in addition to intercommunicate.

Because the AT Protocol is based on a variant of the Remote Procedure Call (RPC) mechanism, which again in this case is based on the HyperText Transfer Protocol (HTTP), it is only a Web Service Architecture (WSA), but not a microService Architecture (mSA).
This has the legal implication, when based on our Ontoverse (Ov) and New Reality (NR), including our Ontologic Net (ON), Ontologic Web (OW), and Ontologic uniVerse (OV), including our Cloud Computing of the second generation (CC 2.0), Cloud Computing of the third generation (CC 3.0), and Cloud-native technologies (Cnx), which are already the successors of the Interconnect network (Internet), the World Wide Web (WWW), and the various (information) spaces, environments, worlds, and universes respectively realities.

We also note once again our

in this context.

The Decentralized Digital IDentity (DDID) with Decentralized IDentifier (DID or DecID) has legal issues, because virtually all of its integrations are copyright infringements regarding the features of our Ontologic System (OS) (see the related quote and comment above), as can be shown here with the AT Protocol.

As not expected otherwise, the AT protocol is a blatant copyright infringement.

See also the conclusion below.

We quote a report about social networking: "[...]
"One thing we've learnt from the past decades is that the last thing the world needs is a one-size-fits all solution for eight billion people," says [a member] of Free Our Feeds' custodians."

Comment
Obviously, this solution is already here and even for longer than all those partial plagiarisms and fakes of our original and unique OS with its OSA, as we have shown above.

Conclusion
In cases of all social media platforms we simply say

• transformative, generative, and creative Bionics,
• Bridge from Natural Intelligence (NI) to Artificial Intelligence (AI) (Bridge from NI to AI), and
• prompt engineering, forming, shaping, configuring respectively cognitive processing, educating, teaching, learning, etc.,

• Conversational Artificial Intelligence (CAI or ConAI), and
• (Information) Retrieval Augmented Generation (RAG),

Obviously, already very well-known fraudulent and even serious criminal entities in governments, sciences, industries, and so on are performing and reproducing our OntoSocial and related basic parts of our OS with its OSA without authorization once again and as usual infringing the rights and properties of C.S. and our corporation.
That it is not the way it works and has become even more obvious.

Having said this, no further discussion outside the courts is required in relation to the exclusive and mandatory infrastructures of our Society for Ontological Performance and Reproduction (SOPR) and our other Societies with their set of foundational and essential facilities, technologies, goods, and services, including our