Segwit Reading Assignment

Blockchain and Bitcoin 101
#2530

  1. Alternative proposal to Segwit was increasing the block size.

  2. Segwit also solved the transaction malleability issue. And enabled the development of second layer protocols.

  3. Sehwit and the Lightning network are connected in that both of them enable a faster transaction speed.

  4. No people, wallets, and other services were not forced to use Segwit.

1 Like
#2531

Answers Segwit

1: What was a proposed alternative to Segwit?
The alternative was to increase the blocksize from 1 to 2 MB. This would have been a not backward compatible update known as a hard fork.

2: What did Segwit solve more than just the scaling issue?
It also solved a secuirity issue (transaction malleability) where the signature inside the transaction could be changed in order to change the transaction ID. This exploit could be used to maniuplate transactions.

3: How is Segwit and the Lightning network connected?
The lightning network is a layer 2 solution which increases scalability of bitcoin. It was made possible through the Segwit-Update.

4: Are people, wallets and other services forced to use Segwit?
No. As the blocksize was not increased, it was a backward compatible update. The update can be seen as a Soft Fork.

1 Like
#2532

1-The alternative to segwit was to increase the block size from 1 mb,
2-Segwit also solved a bug called transaction malleability which was actually the first reason for segwit to be applied
3-Segwit supports the development of second layer protocols thus enabling the use of the lighting network
4-since it is a soft fork the wallets are not forced to use segwit

1 Like
#2533

1.Block size increase.
2.Tx malleability, lowering the fees
3.I it supports the lighting network to develop.
4.No it is a choice.

1 Like
#2534

1.) The development of Bitcoin cash was a hard fork that was used to increase the block size and fix the issue of transaction malleability. An alternative solution to the segwit model.

2.) It also solved the transaction malleability issue where a Transactions ID was able to be altered and change the entire hash.

  1. Segwit helped the development of second layer protocols such as the lightning network

4.) No, older soft forks can be used.

1 Like
#2535

1.the size of a block would be increased
2.resolves transaction malleability which enables adaptions to details for modification purpose
3.Segwit makes two solutions -the lightning network a second network under bitcoin lower risk through the malleability
4.no

1 Like
#2536
  1. Increasing the block size from 1MB to 2MB
  2. It solved the issue with the transaction malleability by removing the signature from the tx
  3. SegWit supports the development of second layer protocols, such as the lightning network
  4. No, because it was a soft fork. But more and more wallets are adding SegWit.
1 Like
#2537
  1. Bitcoin cash
  2. Transactions can’t be changed, because the ID is no longer part of the transaction being sent to the block.
  3. Among fixing the malleability issue, It also supports second layer protocols that creates less risk for relying on unconfirmed transactions, as well as other blockchain developments.
  4. No, they can continue using the old protocol (soft fork), but will be isolated from the more advanced update.
1 Like
#2538
  1. What was a proposed alternative to Segwit?
    Increase the block size.
  2. What did Segwit solve more than just the scaling issue?
    Malleability issue involving being able to change transaction ID’s.
  3. How is Segwit and the Lightning network connected?
    The lighting network is a second layer protocol. It boosts 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, but more have upgraded.
1 Like
#2539
  1. The proposed alternative was to increase the block size to 2mb (or more in the future).
  2. Segwit solved the malleability issue by removing the signature from the hash.
  3. Segwit allowed for layer 2 solutions on Bitcoin Network, so Lightning network was finally introduced thanks as such layer, and it allowed for increased tx/s.
  4. No they are not, the Segwit update was a soft fork.
1 Like
#2540
  1. 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
    2)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.
    3)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)yes
1 Like
#2541

No, old style txs are still valid on Bitcoin. :slight_smile:

#2542
  1. A proposed alternative to segwit was simply increasing the allowable block size up from 1mB, however this was seen by some as a temporary fix because the new block size could also reach its limit at a future time. The alternative solution to increase block size was adopted by the community who created the Bitcoin Cash hardfork.
  2. Segwit also solved the problem of transaction malleability, this was a situation where small alterations in the transaction signatures would change the hash of the transaction ID. This caused potential security issues and prevented development of more complex features. Segwit removes the signature data from the transaction data meaning the block size/weight is reduced and the tx hash can no longer be changed.
  3. Solving the malleability problem meant that using unconfirmed transaction was less risky and easier for second layer protocols such as lightning network. If you want to build second layer solutions you have to ensure no one can alter the first layer.
  4. Wallets and services are not forced to use segwit, after implementing this soft fork in 2017 it took some time for wallet providers to add support for segwit. According to https://99bitcoins.com/bitcoin/segwit/ today only 50% of all bitcoin transactions are mined using segwit.
1 Like
#2543

  1. What was a proposed alternative to Segwit?
    To change the capacity of the block from 1MB to 2MB and more.

  2. What did Segwit solve more than just the scaling issue?
    It solved an issues with transaction malleability by removing the signatures and placing them outside the block. This also lowered the sized of the transaction and the fees.

  3. How is Segwit and the Lightning network connected?
    Segwit supports the development of second layer applications. The lightening network is an example. It akes small frequent transactions off chain creating even more space in the block for transactions.

  4. Are people, wallets and other services forced to use Segwit?
    No it’s a soft fork.

1 Like
#2544

  1. To increase the size of a block from 1 to 2 MB

  2. To fix a possibility for fraud in the bitcoin who allowed anyone to change small details that could modify the transaction id but not the content

  3. Segwit supports the development of the lightning network by that they will rely on unconfirmed transactions who are less risky and easier to design, and the lightning network will boost bitcoin’s transaction capacity by taking frequent, small transactions off-chain

  4. They don’t have to, but it’s an advantage as the transaction fees are lower by using Segwit

1 Like
#2545
  1. Increasing the block size.
  2. Solved transaction malleability and led to more efficient crypto transferring abilities.
  3. Lightning network is run off of the Segwit blueprint allowing for faster and more secure data transfers.
  4. No, but if they dont they risk getting left behind; those who are included in a soft fork remain until they are filtered out.
1 Like
#2546

What do you mean by that? Soft forks provide a degree of backwards compatibility and the Segwit softfork enables users to create old style tx if they so wish and will probably remain that way indefinitely. :slight_smile:

#2547
  1. What was a proposed alternative to Segwit? To increase the block size from 1 MB.
  2. What did Segwit solve more than just the scaling issue? It also removed the TX malleability issue by removing the signature from TX.
  3. How is Segwit and the Lightning network connected? 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, pre-SegWit TX model is still supported.
1 Like
#2548

  1. Raising the block size to 4mB.

  2. It solves the ransaction malleabilty, lower fees also supporting a second layer soloutions.

  3. It supports the developement of second layer protocols like lightning network.

  4. No, it was a soft fork.

1 Like
#2549
  1. increase in block size that has been implemented for bitcoin cash
  2. tx malleability
  3. segwit made possible the development of the Lightning network layer on top of the protocol.
  4. No. it is a soft fork.
1 Like