Segwit Reading Assignment

[Pavel_Djuric]

1. An alternative was to increase the blocksize to 2mB, however, that would have caused a hard fork.
2. It fixed the malleability issue with the possibility to change the transaction signature and thus made it possible to build the lightning network on top of it.
3. Simply put, lightning network works like visa, creating off-chain balance sheets for frequent payments between agents. However, I did not find any in-depth explanation neither in the provided article nor here https://bitcoinmaximalist.net/lightning-network-explained/
4. Not forced, but highly recommended for everyone to use Segwit

[Alko89]

You can check our Lightning course on the academy if you want to learn how Lightning works in more detail

[syrafa]

1. To increase the block size limit.
2. Segwit also solved the malleability issue as well as allowed the blockchain framework to support the development of smart contracts and second layer protocols like the lightning network.
3. SegWit and the lightning network are connected because they both function to reduce transaction cost and increase transaction speed despite one being a soft fork update and the other being a second layer protocol.
4. They are not forced to use SegWit but it is in the best interest for all participants in the network to apply the update as an increase is adoption through lower fees and increased transaction time is something sought after by both users and miners.

[JoshB]

1. Was to increase the block size
2. Segwit solved the transaction malleability issue by removing the signature from the block
3. With segwit in place it makes second layer solution possible
4. No, people and wallets are not forced to use segwit

[Javier_Flores]

Reading Assignment: Segwit (Answers)

1. To increase mB size of blocks more than 1mB.
2. It fixes transaction malleability.
3. Lighting network is a second layer protocol of Segwit.
4. No

[CryptoTrader]

1. What was a proposed alternative to Segwit?
   Increase the size of the block
2. What did Segwit solve more than just the scaling issue?
   it allowed for second layer protocols and smart contracts to be enabled
3. How is Segwit and the Lightning network connected?
   it creates a layer on top of bitcoin which allows for the segregated signatures as well as secondary protocols
4. Are people, wallets and other services forced to use Segwit?
   No

[Alko89]

@CryptoTrader

it allowed for second layer protocols and smart contracts to be enabled

What enabled these second layer solutions?

[SergeDoe]

1. It was to increase block size to 4MB.
2. It additionally it have fixed Tx malleability, which allowed for a malicious user to resign unconfirmed Tx and thus change its id(hash) and pretend that Tx doesn’t exist. If we remove signature from the block, its change won’t effect Tx id.
3. Lightning network channels rely on unconfirmed Txs without committing anything to the blockchain.
4. It is a soft fork - majority have decided for the rest.

[Nigel]

1. A proposed alternative to SegWit was increasing the block size limit.
2. SegWit solved more than just scaling by also solving transaction malleability by storing the signature outside the transaction block.
3. Lightning network uses transactions off-chain, and eventually they get put on the Bitcoin blockchain.
4. People are not forced to use SegWit.

[Alko89]

@SergeDoe

It is a soft fork - majority have decided for the rest.

True, but the old protocol still works as well

[khary_B]

What was a proposed alternative to Segwit?
increase block size
What did Segwit solve more than just the scaling issue?
transaction malleability
How is Segwit and the Lightning network connected?
Segwit allows for development of second layer protocols such as lightning
Are people, wallets and other services forced to use Segwit?
No, they can adopt at their own pace or desire

[SergeDoe]

And it does not add security.

How were people to even agree on consensus from the beginning if they don’t agree on updates?! I think because it was decided for them before mass adoption.

[Faisal2000]

1. What was a proposed alternative to Segwit?
   To increase the block size to 2mb. This would be a temporary solution as soon the transactions would fill up this size limit and only small number of miners would be able to afford the equipment to mine creating more centralization.

2. What did Segwit solve more than just the scaling issue?
   Segwit also solved the “transaction malleability” issue. This was a bug in the Bitcoin code a change in the transaction could occur after the transaction had been added to the blockchain. By altering the signature the transaction ID could be altered. So anyone could make a small change in the the signature and the entire Transaction ID would change. This would change the subsequent hash but not the content of the transactions.

3. How is Segwit and the Lightning network connected?
   Once segwit is in place the lightning network can function as it is dependent on segwit. The Lightning Network is a second network layer that transmit signed but unbroadcast transactions amongst peers that are on the LN. When funds are finally settled then it interacts with the blockchain to update the blockchain.
   The Lightning Network is a network of bitcoin nodes that are holding transactions and funds in multi-sig wallets (“channels”) and exchange amongst each other signed, but unbroadcast, transactions.

4. Are people, wallets and other services forced to use Segwit?
   No, some nodes on the network may not update to the latest bitcoin code, however they will see segwit transactions as without the correct information and will ignore or not validate those transactions. These transaction would go back to the mempool to be picked by a miner who can do segwit transactions.

[Alko89]

@SergeDoe

And it does not add security.

If you use old style transactions then yes, you can still be vulnerable to malleability. Bear in mind that malleability is in fact really hard to pull off and needs to be timed well, so its not as dangerous as it might sound when you’re sending one tx at a time by hand. The issue becomes more prominent when you have autonomous systems transacting between each other.

@SergeDoe

How were people to even agree on consensus from the beginning if they don’t agree on updates?

I’m not sure what exactly you mean, they followed the code provided by the maintainer which at the time was Satoshi. The beauty of open source software is that you can always fork if something is not up to your liking.

[Bojo]

1. Increasing of the block size.
2. Security issue by preventing the change of tranzaction id and tahanks to is aslo boosted the developtment of second layer protocols like lightning.
3. After Segwit update, which fixed security issue - changing the transaction id, is it become possible to develop lightning.
4. No, its not a hard fork update. But it followed to hard fork of bitcoin cash, because some of the users saw the increasing of block size as better decision.

[SergeDoe]

@Alko89

I’m not sure what exactly you mean, they followed the code provided by the maintainer which at the time was Satoshi. The beauty of open source software is that you can always fork if something is not up to your liking.

I mean exactly this. As soon we have “democracy” we have a bunch of forks and no consensus ) Still fun )

[MartyMonster]

1. Implement a larger block size limit rather than rely on a new transaction structure.

2. SegWit’s initial intention was to fix a bug in the bitcoin code called transaction malleability. This flaw allowed anyone to change small details that modified the transaction id (and the subsequent hash) but not the content. While not a critical problem for bitcoin, it prevented the development of more complex features such as second-layer protocols and smart contracts.

3. Another big step forward made possible by SegWit is that it supports the development of second layer protocols, such as the lightning network. The malleability fix made any feature that relied on unconfirmed transactions less risky and easier to design.

4. No.

[Dreddman]

1. What was a proposed alternative to Segwit?

   Block size increase

2. What did Segwit solve more than just the scaling issue?

   Transaction maleability

3. How is Segwit and the Lightning network connected?

   2nd layer solutions are now available

4. Are people, wallets and other services forced to use Segwit?

   No

[Owwzzz]

1. What was a proposed alternative to Segwit?
   blocksize increase
2. What did Segwit solve more than just the scaling issue?
   the transaction malleability by taking the signature out of the block
3. How is Segwit and the Lightning network connected?
   Segwit supports second layer protocols such as lightning network
4. Are people, wallets and other services forced to use Segwit?
   no

[Mike.M]

1. What was a proposed alternative to Segwit?
   Increase the block size from 1MB to 2MB
2. What did Segwit solve more than just the scaling issue?
   Malleability! Segwit prevented anyone changing the signatures on transactions and therefore affecting the transactions.
3. How is Segwit and the Lightning network connected?
   SegWit supports the development of second layer protocols. The lightning network will further boost bitcoin’s transaction capacity by taking frequent, small transactions off-chain, only settling on the bitcoin blockchain when the users are ready.
4. Are people, wallets and other services forced to use Segwit?
   No! More and more wallets are adding Segwit support and until all wallets are integrated, there will be choice.