It was an interesting month for NXT
and SuperNet. How would you describe the relationship between NXT and SuperNET now? The relationship between NXT and SuperNET is still as it always was, one of community co-operation and communication. Both project platforms have a great deal they can bring to the other and much has been accomplished in the twelve months or so since SuperNET’s inception, with many long-standing members of the NXT community putting themselves forward to help develop and promote the various facets of this ‘Crypto 2.0’ environment.
The relationship between NXT and SuperNET is still as it always was, one of community co-operation and communication. Both project platforms have a great deal they can bring to the other and much has been accomplished in the twelve months or so since SuperNET’s inception, with many long-standing members of the NXT community putting themselves forward to help develop and promote the various facets of this ‘Crypto 2.0’ environment.
At the beginning of November, things were very intense. Could you tell us the feeling within the CPMT team?
The CPMT addressed the issues arising during November as being no different to those dealt with during any other month. The nature of the situation is discussed, along with a number of possible resolutions. Some problems can be more frustrating than others but SuperNET has a wide-range of resources and talent to call on in order to better gauge the most appropriate route to take.
What ideas were the CPMT team considering during the crisis?
I don’t think any situation we’ve experienced so far would fit the word, ‘crisis’. We are, after all, talking about a multi-layered decentralised organisational structure. The biggest hurdle to overcome is in correctly establishing the facts, the potential consequences and ideal solution, while communicating a sufficiently reasoned position to explain such in order to encourage the needed change to be implemented. A number of proposals were put forward, along with contingency planning in the event of difficulty in reaching a workable solution, with the focus being on seeking to minimise disruption or delays as much as possible.
There is some tension between key developers of both platforms. Does the future hold some kind of reconciliation between the two parties and what would be needed to do so?
There is no need to ‘reconcile’ when the position is clearly and objectively reasoned. If there is personal tension between some developers it isn’t part of the CPMT’s or, for that matter, SuperNET’s, remit to engage at that level. Everybody involved wants to play their part in developing the future of FinTech and this requires the occasional reminder that we might have the ‘Tech’ part conquered in terms of bleeding-edge innovation, but the ‘Fin’ aspect still needs to function to the commercial level of the real-world in order to translate into the cutting-edge. This means being able to promote the technology as a stable and manageable working environment, with sufficient quality and implementation controls, for existing financial entities to be encouraged to participate.
What is SuperNet’s plan for the future? Do you think SuperNet will stay with NXT or is there a possibly to move to a different blockchain?
SuperNET’s plans for the future are to complete and roll-out the myriad of existing project-arms, only some of which are managed centrally. The CPMT, while acting as a more cohesive and centralised organisational core to the decentralised development structure, is not a controlling authority of SuperNET, its community members are and there are many groups and third-parties working on different elements of the wider ecosystem. Technology and practicality will dictate how front and back-end systems will evolve, not personality.
Any exciting news we can expect from SuperNet in the upcoming months?