Segwit Reading Assignment

Blockchain and Bitcoin 101
#2730
  1. Doubling the block size (a hard fork was a proposed alternative to Segwit, and implemented with Bitcoin Cash.
  2. Segwit solved transaction maleability, where the hash of a transaction could be modified without changing the substance of the transaction, a hackable exploit that could be used for network fraud.
  3. Segwit increased transaction security (by solving the maleability problem), allowing protocols that depend on unconfirmed (off-chain) transactions, such as the Lightning network, to be implemented with more security.
  4. Segwit blocks still fall into the original 1mb size, making it a soft fork whose blocks can be confirmed as valid by any bitcoin node or svp, which means nobody is forced to use Segwit to run a node. (a majority of miners did need to upgrade).
1 Like
#2731

What was a proposed alternative to Segwit?

To increase the size of the block (such as in Bitcoin Cash hardfork)

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

With partial elimination of signature information, it also solved transaction malleability issue, which was risky on unconfirmed transactions.

  1. How are Segwit and the Lightning network connected?

By eliminating signature information in small or unconfirmed transactions, SegWit boosts transaction capacity allowing for faster speeds and smaller fees, allowing for a second-layer protocol, such as lightning network.

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

No, as the bitcoin network still consists of both, the SegWit and the old protocole, however, due to higher speed and smaller fees, it is inevitable, that more wallets and people will use SegWit in the future.

1 Like
#2732

  1. Increase block size

  2. It removed signature outside the block, so even if you change the signature you don’t change the block contents the result of that that Tx ID wont be changed if you change the signature

  3. Its was big step done by Segwit that it started to support second layer protocols -> lightning network. It boosts bitcoins capacity by taking smaller transactions off the until users are ready and after adding them to the chain.

4.No they are not but when it will become the majority there will be no option, but to adopt it, cause people will choose wallet providers that can ensure efficiency and security and lower cost, basically no brainer.

1 Like
#2733

  1. What was a proposed alternative to Segwit?
    Implement a larger block size limit (Bitcoin cash)

  2. What did Segwit solve more than just the scaling issue?
    Fix a bug in the bitcoin code called transaction malleability

  3. How is Segwit and the Lightning network connected?
    Segwit supports the development of second layer protocols, such as the lightning network.

  4. Are people, wallets and other services forced to use Segwit?
    No, the SegWit upgrade is compatible with the previous protocol, and avoids the need for a hard fork.

1 Like
#2734
  1. increase the max size of each block
  2. txs malleability
  3. Segwit paved way for second layer solutions to exist.
  4. no
1 Like
#2735
  1. Increasing block size limit from 1mb to 2mb.
  2. Segwit also solved the transaction malleability issue.
  3. Segwit allowed lightning to resolve frequent transactions between two entities without involving the entire blockchain each transaction.
  4. Technically no, but functionally yes.
1 Like
#2736
  1. A bigger block size limit - Bitcoin cash
  2. Fixes transaction malleability
  3. Lightning is a second layer protocol that works together with segwit.
  4. not yet, but things are moving that way.
1 Like
#2737
  1. The alternative was to just keep increasing the block size.
  2. It solved the transaction malleability by removing the signature.
    3.SigWit made it possible to support the development of second layer protocols such as the lightning network.
  3. No as it is still compatible within the rules of the old protocols.
1 Like
#2738

What was a proposed alternative to Segwit? Bitcoin Cash (BCH). This made the block size larger but required a hard fork.

What did Segwit solve more than just the scaling issue? Segwit fixed transaction malleability which allowed anyone to change small details that modified the transaction ID (and the subsequent hash) but not the content. Segwit fixed transaction malleability by removing the signature information (otherwise known as “witness” information) and storing it outside the base transaction block.

How is Segwit and the Lightning network connected? They are connected through second layer protocols.

Are people, wallets and other services forced to use Segwit? Of course people are going to want to transition. The transition to Segwit allows for faster transaction times, lower tx fees and integration of second layer protocols. Over time, more wallets and services have integrated, allowing for the transition.

1 Like
#2739
  1. The proposed alternative to SegWit was to simply make the Blocks larger. Some members of the community actually decided to implement this solution and as a result we now have BitCoinCash.
  2. SegWit solved the issue of transaction malleability which allowed individuals with sufficient enough knowledge to change the transaction ID’s and corresponding hash without changing the entirety of the transaction itself.
  3. The lightning network will remove fraudulent transactions from the network and basically clean up after the transaction malleability issue.
  4. No-one is forced to use SegWit, they can u[grade if they so choose, but as time goes on it will become the norm at which point those who do not use the protocol will be left behind, or will instead have to use an alternative such as BTC Cash.
1 Like
#2740

You will always be able to make old style txs on Bitcoin. No one will ever be forced to use segwit. :slight_smile:

#2741

1, increase the block size
2, Removed the issue of transaction malleability
3, Allowed second layer protocols possible
4, No

1 Like
#2742

What was a proposed alternative to Segwit?
Proposals such as bitcoin cash, Proposed to increase the block size .

What did Segwit solve more than just the scaling issue?
It removed, the chances of modifying the signature scent in a transaction. Segwit ensured the signature was independent of the hash protocol. This also enabled miners to have more space to add more transactions to individual blocks.

How is Segwit and the Lightning network connected?
segwit allows second Layer protocols, so ideas such as the lightning network, can it be implemented to take away smaller transactions, leaving, even for priority room for larger transactions.

Are people, wallets and other services forced to use Segwit?
It is not a hardfork, but a soft fork

1 Like
#2743
  1. Increase blcok sixe
  2. TXs malleability removing the signature.
  3. SegWit makes Lightning network (second layer) possible.
  4. No. It is compatible with original protocol.
1 Like
#2744

  1. one of the solutions was to increase the size allowed for each block up to 2mB instead or 1. This would only be temporary solution.

  2. It also solved the transaction malleability which allowed for signatures to be changed without interfering with the transaction itself.

  3. Segwit creates a second layer.

  4. The wallets slowly integrated segwit into their systems so it wasn’t a rapid change and people began to understand why. It became more accepted.

1 Like
#2745
  1. A proposed alternative to SegWit was an increase in block size which also lead to a hard fork, Bitcoin Cash.
  2. SegWit solves the transaction malleability and lower fees along with supporting a second layer solution.
    3 SegWit supports the second layer solution which is the lightning network.
  3. No, it is a soft fork, however, wallets are adding SegWit support.
1 Like
#2746

  1. A proposed alternative to Segwit was to simply increase the block size, as was done with Bitcoin Cash.

  2. In additional to the scaling issue, Segwit resolved the issue of transaction malleability.

  3. Segwit added support for second layer protocols such as the lightning network, which can take frequent, small transactions off-chain.

  4. Segwit is not mandatory, but adoption is increasing.

1 Like
#2747
  • What was a proposed alternative to Segwit?
    Increasing block size
  • What did Segwit solve more than just the scaling issue?
    Transaction malleability
  • How is Segwit and the Lightning network connected?
    Since Segwit resolved the tx malleability issue second layer networks such as lightning network were possible
  • Are people, wallets and other services forced to use Segwit? No
1 Like
#2748

  1. to make a hard fork and increase the size of the block

  2. Segwit also solved the TX Malleabilitz

  3. second layer solutions such as the lightning network are supported now.

  4. no, since it is a soft fork. Most services adapted though.

1 Like
#2749

  1. What was a proposed alternative to Segwit? It was proposed to increase the block size instead of using segwit.

  2. What did Segwit solve more than just the scaling issue? Segwit also solved the transaction malleability issue when it came to where signatures are stored.

  3. How is Segwit and the Lightning network connected? You must have segwit to be apart of the lighting network to allow faster transactions to process.

  4. Are people, wallets and other services forced to use Segwit? There are still legacy nodes that do not use segwit and are still a part of the blockchain.

1 Like