Mastercoin Saving Account - implementation ETA and usage questions

[SyRenity]

Hi,

Looking at the MSC saving account feature, I'm wondering when it's exactly going to be implemented?
Will the upcoming masterdaemon support it, or it will have to be extended?
Also, is there a more detailed implementation spec beyond the Whitepaper 1.2?


In addition, I have several points I'd like to clarify about this feature:
1) If I have all my MSC stored in savings account, then decide to use some for buying stuff, other crypto, etc..., I understand the funds have to wait in a temporary pool, for the duration I specified when creating the savings account, in order to get the status "savings" cleared from them.

Who controls this temporary pool, and is there any chance it can be taken out of service in any way, loosing mine and any other pending funds?

2) The procedure above can be as long as a year of time? I.e. if I created by mistake a savings account of 1 year duration, and moved MSC to it, I will have to wait a whole year before I can touch them again? (might be not a bad idea actually, to force oneself wait over any crashes).

3) Is there any chance to send these funds somewhere without the "cool-off" period described above? Or any transaction from the savings wallet will be guaranteed to go through the waiting pool?

3) Will the custom currencies work under same rules? I.e. will it be possible to move GLD, USD (or even BTC, LTC, etc...) into such saving accounts, and enjoy the protection from being hacked and have the funds stolen?

[Tachikoma]

Looking at the MSC saving account feature, I'm wondering when it's exactly going to be implemented?

That's undecided at this moment. Right now features are being developed in serial, this might become paralel in the future if the foundation hires some developers.

Will the upcoming masterdaemon support it, or it will have to be extended?

If you are talking about the reference implementation then it will probably support it, the question however is when.

Also, is there a more detailed implementation spec beyond the Whitepaper 1.2?

The latest spec can always be found here.

I try to focus on the feature at hand, so don't take anything I say beyond this point as any thing official. J.R. is better suited to answer these questions.

In addition, I have several points I'd like to clarify about this feature:
1) If I have all my MSC stored in savings account, then decide to use some for buying stuff, other crypto, etc..., I understand the funds have to wait in a temporary pool, for the duration I specified when creating the savings account, in order to get the status "savings" cleared from them.

Who controls this temporary pool, and is there any chance it can be taken out of service in any way, loosing mine and any other pending funds?

You can still use your Mastercoins to send Simple Send transactions. This means that you will be able to move these funds to an other address and use it for any transaction from there. My question would be how to prevent people from abusing this feature to revert a whole chain of transactions. But I guess that is something for later. As for your question. The pool is not something that exists. It's just an idea. It just means you won't be able to spend your coins on anything else then Simple Sends.

2) The procedure above can be as long as a year of time? I.e. if I created by mistake a savings account of 1 year duration, and moved MSC to it, I will have to wait a whole year before I can touch them again? (might be not a bad idea actually, to force oneself wait over any crashes).

Again, you can touch them earlier. See above.

3) Will the custom currencies work under same rules? I.e. will it be possible to move GLD, USD (or even BTC, LTC, etc...) into such saving accounts, and enjoy the protection from being hacked and have the funds stolen?

From the spec:

If an address is marked as savings, the reversibility rules affect not only Mastercoins, but any Mastercoin-derived child currency stored at that address.

[SyRenity]

I see, thanks for the clarifications.

Provided that I see this feature as being instrumental to MSC success, what would be the best to start discussing it implementation. On these forums or is there some mailing list that I'm not aware of?

[SyRenity]

You can still use your Mastercoins to send Simple Send transactions. This means that you will be able to move these funds to an other address and use it for any transaction from there. My question would be how to prevent people from abusing this feature to revert a whole chain of transactions. But I guess that is something for later. As for your question. The pool is not something that exists. It's just an idea. It just means you won't be able to spend your coins on anything else then Simple Sends.

By the way, if the receiving clients is not set to check whether the incoming transactions are from savings account, potentially it indeed opens a whole new potential for an abuse.

[Tachikoma]

The main problem is that develoment cant happen in parallel, if one implementation doesnt support even one feature none of the results can be guaranteed for that implementation.

[dacoinminster]

We're definitely going to be doing just one feature at a time for awhile. Each feature needs to be well-tested using test Mastercoins, then rolled out for real Mastercoins.

I don't expect that a simple-send will be considered complete until after the waiting period is done. (That is, you can't send it on to another address until after the timer expires, so no chain of transactions to invalidate). The spec is probably not clear on that and needs to be amended. Feel free to submit a pull request

[SyRenity]

The main problem is that develoment cant happen in parallel, if one implementation doesnt support even one feature none of the results can be guaranteed for that implementation.

Therefore I think it's important to discuss it early, in order to insure any upcoming implementations will include it from the start.

[SyRenity]

We're definitely going to be doing just one feature at a time for awhile. Each feature needs to be well-tested using test Mastercoins, then rolled out for real Mastercoins.

I don't expect that a simple-send will be considered complete until after the waiting period is done. (That is, you can't send it on to another address until after the timer expires, so no chain of transactions to invalidate). The spec is probably not clear on that and needs to be amended. Feel free to submit a pull request

Forked, will clarify and ask to pull.

[prophetx]

question for you all about whether this feature could be used to implement a regulation that some US entities will need to follow.  we had someone ask this in an email to info@mastercoin

specifically regulation d of SEC Rule 506 (http://www.sec.gov/answers/rule506.htm)

one of the rules is:

Purchasers receive "restricted" securities, meaning that the securities cannot be sold for at least a year without registering them.

So let's say that ACME Co., a US company, wants to sell X shares under Rule 506 of Reg D, and their legal counsel says they need to abide by this rule.  I am unsure whether it is the obligation of the company or of the shareholder, but let's assume the company needs to issue restricted shares that are not transferable for 1 year; I also do not understand the term "without registering them".

Could the issuer issue shares to investors using this savings address mechanism so that they are restricted for 365 days?

[dacoinminster]

question for you all about whether this feature could be used to implement a regulation that some US entities will need to follow.  we had someone ask this in an email to info@mastercoin

specifically regulation d of SEC Rule 506 (http://www.sec.gov/answers/rule506.htm)

one of the rules is:

Purchasers receive "restricted" securities, meaning that the securities cannot be sold for at least a year without registering them.

So let's say that ACME Co., a US company, wants to sell X shares under Rule 506 of Reg D, and their legal counsel says they need to abide by this rule.  I am unsure whether it is the obligation of the company or of the shareholder, but let's assume the company needs to issue restricted shares that are not transferable for 1 year; I also do not understand the term "without registering them".

Could the issuer issue shares to investors using this savings address mechanism so that they are restricted for 365 days?

Not under the current spec, but this is something we could add if enough people wanted it. I personally expect few will want it. Most people want to completely sidestep all this regulation.