Segwit Reading Assignment

Blockchain and Bitcoin 101
#2410
  1. What was a proposed alternative to Segwit?

Increase the block size which was Bitcoin Cash’s solution

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

Transaction malleability and make room for a fast second layer like lightening possible

  1. How is Segwit and the Lightning network connected?

Lightening network is built upon Segwit

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

No, but if 95% is adopted then the rest is mandatory

2 Likes
#2411

I’m not sure about that. Technically you could always do old style transactions even if a large majority adopts Segwit. :slight_smile:

#2412

  1. Increases block size, hard fork.

  2. Malleability fixed, stores signature information outside of the base transaction block.

  3. They allow for the development of second layer protocols.

  4. No. People, wallets, and other services are not forced to use Segwit.

1 Like
#2413
  1. What was a proposed alternative to Segwit?

Increasing the blocksize

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

It solved the TX Id malleability

  1. How is Segwit and the Lightning network connected?

Segwit made second layer solutions possible.

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

No, it is a soft fork

1 Like
#2414

  1. increasing block size

  2. they solved the tx malleability issue which was people changing the signature in end result of getting another party who is not as informed to double spend.

  3. they are connected because it is used as another another layer of protocol, and 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. yes because when blockchain applies a softfork update, it will implement segwit. forcing applications and wallets to adhere to new protocol.

1 Like
#2415

1.to increase 1mb to 2 Mb
2.it also solve the cheating issues
3.lighting and segwit is connected by second layer.
4.no, they are not forced.

1 Like
#2416

1- A larger block size for the chain was proposed. From the 1MB to more since we were coming up against capacity issues per block.

2- Segwit also solved malleability. Which means the modification of signatures that were originally part of the block, no longer affect the hash which in turn no longer affects the tx id.

3- Segwit is an update for bitcoins blockchain that is made for second layer solution protocols like the lightning network. Naturally, this is why they are connected.

4- No they are not.

DuukA!

1 Like
#2417

Actually old style txs are still valid on Bitcoin. :slight_smile:

1 Like
#2418
  1. To increase the size of a block.
  2. Sewit helped to solve transaction malleability as well as decreasing fees and transaction wait time.
  3. Segwit helped to support second layer solutions which made the lightning network possible.
  4. No, segwit was part of a soft fork but more wallets are updating to include segwitted transactions.
1 Like
#2419

What was a proposed alternative to Segwit?

A proposed alternative to Segwit was expanding the block size.

What did Segwit solve more than just the scaling issue?

Segwit also solved the issue of transaction malleability.

How is Segwit and the Lightning network connected?

Segwit supports a second layer protocol such as the Lightning network which opens up bitcoin’s transaction capacity.

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

They are not forced to use Segwit since it is still compatible with the old protocol, but more services are working to integrate it.

2 Likes
#2420

A proposed alternative to Segwit was simply to increase the allowable block size to 2MB.

Segwit solved the scaling issue and also solved the Transaction Malleability bug.

Because the transaction malleability issue is solved, segwit allows the development of 2nd layer protocols such as the Lightning Network.

People, wallets and other services are not forced to use Segwit.

1 Like
#2421

An alternative proposal was to increase the block size from 1 to 2 MB

Segwit was able to solve the txn malleability issue by storing the txn signature separately.

Segwit supports layer two protocols such as the Lightning Network. The malleability fix made the implementation of features which rely on unconfirmed transactions less risky and simpler to design.

No, SegWit is a soft fork. Upgrading to it is incentivised though, through lower transaction fees and faster transaction times

1 Like
#2422
  1. What was a proposed alternative to Segwit?
  • The proposed alternative was to increase the maximum allowable size of a block from 1 MB to a higher value. This method was abandoned mainly due to the necessity of implementing a Hard Fork and also due to disadvantages resulted from longer broadcasting time required for transmitting blocks with bigger size.
  1. What did Segwit solve more than just the scaling issue?
  • It solved the transaction malleability which allowed a transaction receiver to intercept and modify a transaction sender’s signature, which in consequence changes the transaction ID and the receiver could receive more coins from the sender. SegWit solves this issue by segregating the sender’s digital signature from the rest of the transaction, so the potential malicious receiver has no longer the possibility of changing the sender’s transaction ID.
  1. How is Segwit and the Lightning network connected?
  • With the transaction malleability fix, SegWit brings increased the security for transactions between peers (such as micropayment channels) on the Lightning Network (a second layer network protocol which allows payments to be securely routed across multiple peer-to-peer payment channels). Without the transaction malleability fix, transactions on the Lightning Network would have been too risky to be practical.
  1. Are people, wallets and other services forced to use Segwit?
  • By being a Soft-Fork, it is not mandatory for people, wallets and other services to use Segwit.
2 Likes
#2423
  1. Increasing the block size
  2. Transaction malleability, making sure that you can’t change the transaction id to try and manipulate people into paying twice.
  3. You can now do second layer transactions which can be settled on the “main” bitcoin blockchain later, which can lead to faster transaction speed and lower costs.
  4. No, because it’s retro-compatible with the original rules. Each wallet has to make the update.
1 Like
#2424

  1. A proposed alternative to Segwit was Bitcoin Cash a fork of the Bitcoin network, which increased the block size rather than adjust the transaction structure.

  2. In addition to the scalability issue, Segwit fixed the malleability issue also.

  3. Segwit and Lightning network are connected by Segtwit fixing the malleability issue which allowed for second layer protocols such as Lighting network.

  4. Segwit is a soft fork; thus previous nodes with old consensus are still able to use.

1 Like
#2425
  1. What was a proposed alternative to Segwit?
    Increase the maximum block size.
  2. What did Segwit solve more than just the scaling issue?
    The transaction malleability. Without segwit, the receiver its possible to change de signature of the tx.
  3. How is Segwit and the Lightning network connected?
    Segwit makes the lightning network possible
  4. Are people, wallets and other services forced to use Segwit?
    No, it was a soft-fork
1 Like
#2426

#1) Alternative was increasing block size (a hard fork)
#2) It solved the transaction malleability by separating transactions from their digital signatures. This meant that if a user changed the signature, this would no change the transaction hashed ID and therefore double spending would be prevented.
#3) The lightning network further boost bitcoin’s transaction capacity by taking frequent, small transactions off-chain, only settling on the bitcoin blockchain when the users are ready. Lightning network is a secondary protocol built on Sedwit.
#4) No, although the transaction fees for those not using Segwit can be higher.

1 Like
#2427

  1. To have larger block sizes.

  2. It solves the tx malleability issues

  3. Segwit made second layer protocols such as the lightning network less risky.

  4. No because it was a soft fork.

1 Like
#2428
  1. What was a proposed alternative to Segwit?

An alternative was increasement of block size limit of 1MB. This would require a hard fork.
Bitcoin cash is a hard fork of bitcoin, with increased block size of 8MB. In case of bitcoin cash, instead of adoption, the result was seccession and birth of new cryptocurrency.

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

It solved transaction malleability. Solution was made by removing the signature out of transaction, that way it cannot be altered.

  1. How is Segwit and the Lightning network connected?

Segwit made second layer solutions like Lightning possible by increasing bitcoins security.

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

No, because Segwit is a soft fork and allows continuous use without 100% adoption.

1 Like
#2429
  1. A proposed alternative to Segwit is larger block size.
  2. Segwit intial intention was to fix a bug.
  3. Segwit and Lightning network are connected in that while Segwit will fix the bugs 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.no
1 Like