Segwit Reading Assignment

Blockchain and Bitcoin 101
#2370

I’m not sure what you are referring to? A transaction takes time to broadcast through the network and then it waits in the mempool for the miner to pick it up and puts it in a block.

You can still use old style txs on Bitcoin as well. :slight_smile:

#2371
  1. -> Simply increasing the block size from 1MB to a higher one
  2. -> Without signature information transactions can be processed way faster -> greater amount of transactions
  3. -> SegWit supports the development of second layer protocols such as Lightning Network which boosts transactions by taking frequent and small transactions off-chain.
  4. -> Since SegWit caused no hard fork (block size limit remains at 1 MB for the base transactions) all wallets and other services can proceed on the old blockchain protocol
1 Like
#2372
  1. A hardfork
  2. It also solved the Transaction Malleability ™
  3. Segwit solves the problem of Blocksize and TM but a layer on top the Lightning network solved the speed problem for small transactions.
  4. No force because it is a soft fork and therefore backwards compatible.
1 Like
#2373
  1. What was a proposed alternative to Segwit?
    Increase of the block size
  2. What did Segwit solve more than just the scaling issue?
    it has scale and solve the transaction malleability issue
  3. How is Segwit and the Lightning network connected?
    after the implementation of segwit the door has opened for 2nd layer solutions like lighting network as the malleability problem was preventing it
  4. Are people, wallets and other services forced to use Segwit?
    No adoptation is still continuing , actually the creation of btc cash was one of the side effects
1 Like
#2374

  1. Increase the block size.

  2. It enabled a greater amount of transactions within the 1MB block.
    It also enabled the development of second layer protocols such as the lighting network.

  3. The lightning network enabled the boosting of the transaction capacity, by taking frequent, small transactions off the chain, and settling the balance of the bitcoin blockchain when the user was ready.

  4. No, a consensus could not be agreed, and some within the community believe this is a temporary solution and kicking the can down the road. This led to a hard fork, and the creation of Bitcoin cash. Several wallets have yet to add SegWit support, however, wallets such as; Trezor, Ledger, Electrum, and now Coinbase have enabled this feature. .

1 Like
#2375

  1. Alternative to Segwit is simple increase of block size.

  2. Segwit solve malleability issue on top of the scaling issue.

  3. Segwit made possible second layer protocol such as Lightning network.

  4. As Segwit is introduced as Soft fork, people, wallets and other services are not forced to use Segwit.

1 Like
#2376
  1. Increase in block size.
  2. Transaction malleability by removing signature from the block.
  3. Segwit allowed the development of second layer protocols like the Lightning network.
  4. No, it is compatible with old protocol.
1 Like
#2377
  1. A proposed alternative to Segwit was increasing the block size to 2mb.
  2. Segwit also solved the problem of transaction malleability.
  3. The lightning network is built off of Segwit.
  4. Segwit was a soft fork, so no.
1 Like
#2378

  1. The proposed alternative to Segwit was increasing the block size to 2MB. This created a hard fork where Bitcoin Cash became a token to utilize this protocol.

  2. Segwit also increased security of transactions by removing malleability. Transactions took less space without the signatures included in hashes and also were unable to be changed by outside parties to disguise transaction codes. It also solved the issue of creating a hard fork by allowing for a 4MB max “block weight” that included segregated witness data allthough it would not be included in the final 1MB base transition block.

  3. Segwit is connected to the lightning network because of reliance on unconfirmed transactions. The lightning network takes frequent smaller size transactions off-chain and combines them later on when users are ready. This allows for even less transactions taking up space in the block, keeping down transaction fees and transaction time to under 7 per second.

  4. People, wallets, and other services aren’t forced to use Segwit but are still allowed to keep transaction ID’s saved. As long as block hashes created by miners are valid and fit the 4MB maximum hash weight they can be trimmed to the 1MB base transision block.

1 Like
#2379

To increase the block size which lead to a hard fork.

It increased transactions in a block and remove signatures from transactions so blocks can accept more transactions within the size limit.

Segwit supports the development of second layer protocols like Lightning.

No. Segwit is a soft fork so they aren’t forced to implement the upgrade.

1 Like
#2380

The proposed alternative to SegWit was Bitcoin Cash.
The SegWit change allowed for more transaction thruput on the blockchain network.
The lightning network protocol is based on using SegWit revised block structure.
No, the BTC services are not forced to use this SegWit protocol.

1 Like
#2381
  1. Increasing the Block size to greater than 1 MB
  2. DId away with the transaction malleability problem.
  3. Because of the transaction malleability problem being removed, it allowed other applications to make use of this now removed limitation that had to be dealt with previously. Lightning network takes smaller transactions and only adds them to the Bitcoin block periodically, which allows for Bitcoin to function more efficiently.
  4. No, adoption of the protocol occured slowly, and since it wasn’t a hard fork the network could still function under the old rules. A hardfork was done where the blocksize was increased to greater than 1 MB and that new fork becamse Bitcoin Cash
1 Like
#2382
  • What was a proposed alternative to Segwit?

A proposed alternative was to increase blocksize from 1MB to 2MB.

  • What did Segwit solve more than just the scaling issue?

Segwit so solved the concern about malleability of the script signature.

  • How is Segwit and the Lightning network connected?

Segwit supports the development of second layer protocols such as the Lightning network.

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

Nobody is forced to use Segwit.

1 Like
#2383

  1. As an alternative solution instead of Segwit was to increase block size to 2mB. This disagreement created a chain split into B-Cash.

  2. In addition to solving scaling issues, Segwit supports the development of second-layer protocols.

  3. One such supported second-layer protocol is the lightning network. The proposed use case for this layer is to take smaller transactions and settle them on lightning rather than bitcoin.

  4. As Segwit is a soft fork, it is not a required upgrade.

1 Like
#2384

It also solved the tx malleability issue. :slight_smile:

#2385

  1. To increase the block size limit to 2MB or larger.

  2. Malleability, which has to do with the transaction signature.

  3. Segwit made it possible for second layer protocols such as Lightning Network possible.

  4. No, it is optional.

1 Like
#2386

1.) To increase the block size limit (greater than 1mB)
2.) It solved transaction malleability by removing the signature data the main transaction block and storing it outside of the block.
3.) SegWit allowed second layer protocols, such as the lightning network.
4.) People aren’t required to use segwit since it’s a soft fork.

1 Like
#2387

What was a proposed alternative to Segwit?

Yes Segwit2x as Hard Fork Proposal.

What did Segwit solve more than just the scaling issue?

Yes the problems solved with SegWit are:

  • Transaction malleability
  • Upscale capabilities

How is Segwit and the Lightning network connected?

The Lightning Network is a “layer 2” payment protocol that operates on top of a blockchain-based cryptocurrency.

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

SegWit is an optional protocol upgrade to blockchain networks, first activated in 2017 on the Litecoin and then on the Bitcoin networks.

1 Like
#2388

Segwit2x was a thing when Segwit was already activated. The alternative at the time was to simply increase the block size. :slight_smile:

#2389

  1. What was a proposed alternative to Segwit?
    Block size increase.

  2. What did Segwit solve more than just the scaling issue?
    It fixed transaction malleability, whereby someone can change the transaction ID buy altering the transaction in small ways.

  3. How is Segwit and the Lightning network connected?
    It allows the developmet of layer 2 solutions, like the lightning network.

  4. Are people, wallets and other services forced to use Segwit?
    No, since its a softfork its also compatible witht the previous protocol state.

1 Like