Segwit Reading Assignment

[gmean1.618]

1. A larger limit per block.

2. By removing the scriptSig and storing it separate from the node, Tx decreased in size. Allowing more Tx in a block. This also removed the potential manipulation of the hash by changing the scriptSig that was previously part of the data the generated a hash.

3. Segwit made 2nd layer protocols possible. Such as lighting network.

[loso]

1. A proposed alternative to Segwit was a a hardfork that increase transaction size from 1mB to 2mB. (popularly known as Bitcoin Cash)

2. Segwit solved the transaction malleability problem that was occurring allowing people to change transaction IDs. This allowed for 2nd layer applications to be created such as smart contracts.

3. Segwit solved the transaction malleability so that depending on unconfirmed transaction was less risky.

4. People are not forced to use Segwit but using Segwit does allow for advantage in creating blocks with more transactions and requiring less storage to keep full record of the blockchain.

[supertramp007]

1. What was a proposed alternative to Segwit? Increase block size
2. What did Segwit solve more than just the scaling issue? lower fees and transaction malleability
3. How is Segwit and the Lightning network connected? It’s a second layer solution.
4. Are people, wallets and other services forced to use Segwit? No

[Alex_A]

1. A proposed alternative to SegWit was the increase of block size
2. Transaction malleability
3. Lightning network is one of a second layer protocols, that became safe to use with SeWit implementation due lower risk of malleability.
4. Wallets, people and services are free to chosse whether to support SegWit implementation or not. An example - Bitcoin Cash community had chosen to increase the block size against SeWith TRX restructuring approach

[Osgren]

1. Increasing the blocksize from the current 1MB.

2. Segwit also solved TX malleability. The signature is no longer part of the hash, so altering the signature doesn’t change the hash.

3. Segwit makes lightning network possible. Relying on unconfirmed TXs became less risky and also easier to design.

4. It was a Soft Fork so no.

[Mehdi369]

1. To increase Blocks size.

2.Malleability.

3.Segwit helped build it.

4.Well if it is the consensus then yes, eventually.

[Alko89]

@Alex_A

An example - Bitcoin Cash community had chosen to increase the block size against SeWith TRX restructuring approach

@Mehdi369

4.Well if it is the consensus then yes, eventually.

You can still make old style transactions on Bitcoin just fine

[TheCryptoRat]

1. What was a proposed alternative to Segwit?
   BCH was the alternative and proposed setting a new block size entirely and resulted in a hard fork
2. What did Segwit solve more than just the scaling issue?
   It also fixed the transaction malleability issue meaning that the txn ID can’t be changed if the Signature is changed as the signature is outside the block.
3. How is Segwit and the Lightning network connected?
   Segwit allowed layer 2 scaling solutions such as the lightening network to be implemented and more complex smart contracts to be used which increased speed and reduced fees.
4. Are people, wallets and other services forced to use Segwit?
   No this is an optional update as the existing transactions and addresses can still be used as it was a soft fork.

[nachogama]

1. Increasing the block size

2. It also solve the issue of block malleability

3. Lightning network requires segwit to work

4. No

[Csabacypto]

1,The other alternative was to increase the block size

2,It also solved a bug in the system called, tx malleability that allowed people to change a little details in the transaction leaving the input and output untouched and therefore people were able to get double payment by creating an other transaction ID for the original and making it look deleted.

3,Segwit supports second layer protocol that allows them to work together

4,they are not forced, it is a soft fork

[JamesM]

1. What was a proposed alternative to Segwit?

• Proposed alternative was to increase block size.

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

• The scaling issue was actually secondry to a malleability / security issue which Segwit fixed by separating the signatures from the actual TX. This therefore also reduce the TX size enabling more TXS to fit into a block without having to increase it.

3. How is Segwit and the Lightning network connected?

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

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

• No, this was a soft fork

[whiteRabbit]

1. increasing the block size to allow for more tx’s to be processed
2. it also prevented the need to create more complex second layer protocol solutions, and more complex smart contracts
3. by a second layer protocol
4. no

[Dianne]

1. What was a proposed alternative to Segwit? An increase in blocksize
2. What did Segwit solve more than just the scaling issue? Yes, lower fees, size and malleability.
3. How is Segwit and the Lightning network connected? It allows the development of second layer protocols allowing for more transaction per second.
4. Are people, wallets and other services forced to use Segwit? No- optional until adaptability reaches 95% ten no choice but to go forward.

[Vikthor]

What was a proposed alternative to Segwit?

• raising the blocksize.

What did Segwit solve more than just the scaling issue?

• Transaction malleability - that you can make changes in the signature of a block and change that way the transaction ID.

How is Segwit and the Lightning network connected?

• segwit made lightning possible.

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

• no - it was a softfork.

[machonacho]

1. To increase the block size limit.

2. Prevented transaction malleability by removing the signature from the transaction id.

3. Segwit supports the development of second layer protocols.

4. No. Old addresses and transactions can be used.

[Kevin_S_Turner]

1. What was a proposed alternative to Segwit?

A proposed alternative to SegWit was to increase the block size to allow for more transactions in a block, which represented multiple issues and ultimately, a hard fork.

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

SegWit solved the issue of transaction malleability by separating the signatures from the transactions. It also paved the way for second layer protocols development and adoption.

3. How is Segwit and the Lightning network connected?

SegWit and the Lightning network both enable for more transaction capacity. Additionally, Lightning uses signatures separately from transactions.

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

Quite simply; no.

[youremind.me]

1…to raise the block size
2… TX Malleability, made second layer protocols possible, lightning network
3…segWit enabled second layer solution so the lightning network can process many small transactions off-chain before broadcasting/implementing it to the blockchain.
4…No, block weight still allows a blocksize of 4MB .

[Victiinii]

1. What was a proposed alternative to Segwit?
   raise 1mb to higher amount 2mb, etc
2. What did Segwit solve more than just the scaling issue?
   decrease size of tx transcation, remove sign of tx
3. How is Segwit and the Lightning network connected?
   a second layer solution, allows a seperate node to process smaller transcation off chain
4. Are people, wallets and other services forced to use Segwit?
   No, it was not a hardfork

[JayJay]

1. What was a proposed alternative to Segwit?
   Increasing block size. This change alone would have alleviated the speed/expense problem of scaling but not the problem of transaction malleability.

2. What did Segwit solve more than just the scaling issue?
   Transaction malleability, the vulnerability of the network to a change of signatures making it look like a payment that had been confirmed in fact hadn’t.

3. How is Segwit and the Lightning network connected?
   Segwit allowed for the Lightning network, a second layer protocol, to move small frequent Txs off chain until they are ready to be settled, thereby reducing these Txs usage of 1st layer block space.

4. Are people, wallets and other services forced to use Segwit?
   No, the Segwit update is backward compatible.

[Rindo]

1. To implement a larger block size limit. (Bitcoin Cash)
2. Transaction malleability.
3. Segwit supports the development of second layer protocols like Lightning network.
4. Nope, but Segwit transactions will be cheaper.