You are viewing a single comment's thread from:
RE: Instant liquidity for a fee?
I like the lock-in period. To me the most palpable benefit is it functions to secure those funds if your account gets hacked. A lot of people who have had their accounts hacked were able to recover their accounts and only lost the liquid portion of their Steem holdings.
I think Savings fulfills anti-hacking purpose. I also think 3 months long lock-in is unattractive for some investors. If it was shorter like 3 weeks, I can see some crypto hodlers switching to steem and as consequence become long term Steemians.
Savings doesn't fulfill anti-hacking, IMO. How many people do you know use Savings feature?
very good point... i was not taking into account the safety aspect of it... I will try to think of a way this could happen.
While we're hardforking, we could require multisig.
Choose two other accounts as signatories who need to approve a request to transfer vests.
Love the idea, but without any additional safety mechanism I don't think it's worth it.
I was kind of landing into that conclusion... make it to where these types of transactions have to be multi sig by possibly witnesses, maybe at a min rank or something.
But, the more I think about the idea, the more I like it...
Thanks for stopping by Matt
@mattclarke just chimed in... maybe multisig is the only way it could be safe enough... it complicates things, but it would technically solve it.