- To increase the block size.
- It enabled a greater number of Tx within the 1MB blocks.
- SegWit “supports the development of second layer protocols.” It made features that “relied on unconfirmed Tx less risky and easier to design.” The Lightening Network “further boosted bitcoin’s Tx capacity by taking frequent, small Tx off-chain.”
- No.
1 Like
[quote=“filip, post:1, topic:8408”]
-
What was a proposed alternative to Segwit?
increase of block size which resulted to hard fork in the bitcoin network. Which was thought as a temporary fix to the scaling solution as time goes. other alternative after the segwit is the lighting network which will use the data structure to process more transaction. -
What did Segwit solve more than just the scaling issue?
it was able to prevent transaction meability which the data structure was changed so that the signature was kept outside the contents of the transaction input. and hence change of signature wont change the transaction id -
How is Segwit and the Lightning network connected?
they are scaling solution , lightning network second layer on top of segwit -
Are people, wallets and other services forced to use Segwit?
they more the adapt. it the more the transaction becomes cheaps as transacation are added fast .
1 Like
- A proposed alternative to Segwit was to increase the block size of each block. This would have cause a more centralized mining process due to a need for more hardware as well as faster internet to propagate newly discovered blocks through the network.
- Segwit solved the scaling issue but it also solved the issue of Transaction Malleability by removing the signatures from the hash required to form the transaction ID. The original intent of Segwit was actually to solve this and not the scaling issue.
- Segwit paved the way for new layer 2 solutions to be developed, most notably the Lightning Network. This is so because the Lightning Network operates by taking the more small and frequent transactions offline and only settling on-chain when the users are ready.
- People wallets and services are not forced to use Segwit because it is a soft-fork.
1 Like
- What was a proposed alternative to Segwit?
A larger block size limit. - What did Segwit solve more than just the scaling issue?
The Tx malleability issue was fixed making Tx more secure. - How is Segwit and the Lightning network connected?
Segwit added second layer protocols, including the Lightning Network. This made it possible to process more Tx. - Are people, wallets and other services forced to use Segwit?
No, as it’s a soft fork, adaptation happens gradually.
1 Like
- Increase in block size which leads to a hard fork.
2.It solved tx malleability exploits. - Segwit supports the development of second layer protocols which the lightning network is.
- No, since it is a soft fork.
1 Like
- The proposed alternative to Segwit was to increase the block size limit.
- Segwit solved the tx malleability issue by removing the signatures from the tx data structure and putting them outside the block.
- By fixing the malleability problem, and making txs less risky, allowed the development of second layer protocols including the lightening network.
- People are not forced to use Segwit, they can use Bitcoin Cash.
1 Like
They can also still make old style txs on Bitcoin as well. 
-
What was a proposed alternative to Segwit?
Size limit increase -
What did Segwit solve more than just the scaling issue?
It solved malleability, which was I believe main reason for segwit itself -
How is Segwit and the Lightning network connected?
N/A -
Are people, wallets and other services forced to use Segwit?
No
1 Like
- To increase the size the block height.
- Tx malleability and more space for a second layer
- Lightning network is build on segwit
- No. people can choose old nodes or updated nodes.
1 Like
What do you mean? 
What was a proposed alternative to Segwit?
Increasing the blocksize.
What did Segwit solve more than just the scaling issue?
It also solved the security issue concerning the change of signature after a transaction has been sent. Until Segwit was introduced, the sender’s signature was part of the transaction data structure. Changing the signature after transaction was already sent would of course change the hash of the transaction id completely.
How is Segwit and the Lightning network connected?
The Lightning Network is a second Layer solution that builds upon the bitcoin blockchain. Through Segwit, the Lightning Blockchain was made possible.
Are people, wallets, and other services forced to use Segwit?
No, as it is a soft fork update.
1 Like
N/A stands for Non applicable, meaning that I’m clueless in this case! 🤷
- increase in block size (that led to Bitcoin Cash)
- Solve the transaction malleability issue
- Without solving the transaction malleability, the Lightning network could not properly function on top of the BTC network. Since the lighting network would rely on partially unconfirmed smaller transactions and taking them off chain.
- The can decide to upgrade or not.
1 Like
By solving the tx malleability issue with Segwit, the lightning network was made easier and safer to implement. 
-
What was a proposed alternative to Segwit?
Increasing the block size. -
What did Segwit solve more than just the scaling issue?
It also solved the malleability issue, making it impossible for people to change the transaction ID without also affecting the transaction results. -
How is Segwit and the Lightning Network connected?
Segwit protocol allows for the use of “second layer protocols” to provide more options to increase the efficiency of the BTC network. One of these protocols is the Lighting Network, which works to free up even more space within each block and increase mining efficiency. -
Are people, wallets and other services forced to use Segwit?
No, since it was a soft fork and entities can decide whether or not to upgrade their nodes.
1 Like
Hi @filip, how are you?
In the video you said that an Hard fork would have led to a temporary solution, as I have understood it, in the article it says that with “block weight.” the block size with and without the signature data, and is capped at 4MB, while the block size limit for the base transactions remains at 1MB.
So it still just is a temporary solution, is it correct?
- Block size increase
- Transaction malleability
- Helps to make 2nd layer solution like lightning network possible
- NO, as it was a soft fork
1 Like
-
To increase the block size to allow more transactions.
-
The transaction malleability problem that allows to change the signature making the blockchain change
-
Segwit has enabled the development of the second layer protocols such as lightning network
-
No, one can choose to use segwit
1 Like
-
What was a proposed alternative to Segwit?
-
What did Segwit solve more than just the scaling issue?
-
How is Segwit and the Lightning network connected?
-
Are people, wallets and other services forced to use Segwit?
Answers
1). The proposed alternative to Segwit was block size increase.
2). More than just scaling issue, Segwit solved the problem of transactions malleability.
3). Segwit and lightning network are connected because Segwit supports the development of second layer protocols, such as the lightning network.
4). No
1 Like
The proposed alternative to Segwit was to increase the block size from 1mB to 2mB
Segwit solved not only the scaling issue but the transaction malleability or changing the signature of a transaction.
The Lightning Network is a second layer protocol to boost Bitcoins transaction capacity by taking frequent and small transactions off the chain. The transactions are returned to the block chain when they are ready for them. Does this slow down the smaller transactions?
From my understanding, people, wallets and other services are not required to use Segwit, however, I sense that it will be. Not sure on this one.
1 Like