Segwit Reading Assignment

Blockchain and Bitcoin 101
#2972
  1. A proposed alternative to Segwit was to increase the maximum Block size from 1MB to 2MB.
  2. Besides the scaling issue Segwit also solved the socalled Transaction Malleability.
  3. Segwit paved the way for Second Layer Protocols, such as the Lightning Network.
  4. No. There has been a gradual adoption of Segwit.
1 Like
#2973
  1. An alternative to Segwit was to increase the size of the blocks (Hard-fork that turned into bitcoinCash).
  2. It also addressed the transaction Malleability concern/issue.
  3. By correcting the transaction maleability concern it allowed BTC to developed layer 2 solutions which are programs ontop of the blockchain that deal with a group of transactions where the final result is only recorded on the blockchain. Without Segwit Lightening would not have been possible.
  4. No, it doesnt force the user to use Segwit however the user trying to use a non-segwit transaction would have to pay much higher fees as their transaction size would be larger & take up more room on the chain.
1 Like
#2974
  1. Bitcoin Cash - which was the hard fork that increased the block size cap.
  2. Segwit also solved the transaction malleability issue.
  3. The Lightning Network and Segwit are connected by the Lightning Network boosting Bitcoin’s transaction capacity by taking small transactions that happen often off-chain.
  4. No, people and wallets don’t/didn’t have to update.
1 Like
#2975
  1. a hardfork with increased block size
  2. it removes scriptsig which prevents transaction malleability
  3. segwit makes layer 2 solutions possible
  4. no, it’s an optional update, a softfork
1 Like
#2976

  1. Another proposed solution to the issue of block size was simply to raise it up. It was thought by some to be a quick fix. Although so was Segwit to those who didn’t support it, i.e. Bitcoin Cash which chose to go with the higher limits in lieu of the Segwit solution.

  2. Segwit seems to have come with a host of other benefits besides just the scaling solution. One of the more important issues is that of Malleability which was the original reason it was presented in 2015. It just so happened to solve the pressing issue of the block size as well. Its like drinking green juice for high blood pressure and it turns out you lose weight AND getting clearer more vibrant skin. too…lol Win win. :smiley:

3.The Lightening Network (which I think is BRILLIANT btw) takes frequented smaller transactions off chain and they are only brought back to the Bitcoin network when the user is ready for them. The article didn’t specify but I can only assume that signatures would be considered small but frequent bits of data that can be removed from the base transactions and called upon when needed.

4.It seems the answer to this would be no using the case of Bitcoin Cash as an example. They can go off chain and continue with older protocols or other upgrades like the raising of the block size.

1 Like
#2977

  1. Expanding the block sizes from 1 mB

  2. It also solved the issue of transaction malleability which allowed users to change small details that modified the transaction id and the subsequent hash but not the contents.

  3. Segwit supports the development of second layer protocols such as the lightning network which will further boost bitcoin’s transaction capacity by taking frequent small transactions off-chain, only settling on the bitcoin blockchain when users are ready.

  4. No they are not forced.

1 Like
#2978

1.increase block size.
2.solved the issue of transaction malleability.
3.segwit supports the development of second layer protocols.
4.no

1 Like
#2979

Bitcoin still supports old style transactions just fine, so its not forced. :slight_smile:

1 Like
#2980

1. What was a proposed alternative to Segwit?
Increase the Blocksize from 1 to 2 MB .

2. What did Segwit solve more than just the scaling issue?
It solved also the malleability issue which means separating the signature from the TX

3. How is Segwit and the Lightning network connected?
Segwith supports the development of second layer protocols which makes the lightning network possible for BTC use

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

1 Like
#2981
  1. The increase of the block size
  2. It also solved the TX malleabilty issue by removing the signatures from the TXs and storing it
    outside the base TX block. This way, making alterations to signatures and scripts would not affect
    the TX id.
  3. By the fact that segwit supports the development of second layer protocols. By connecting with
    lightning network, the btc’s TXs capacity has been boosted, with also the reduction of risk and easier
    way to design by fixing the malleability issue.
  4. No. In fact was resistance to segwit that spawned Bitcoin Cash, so it was a soft fork.
1 Like
#2982
  1. A larger block size.
  2. Transaction malleability
  3. Segwit supports development of second layer protocols
  4. No, old addresses still can be used. Soft fork styley.
1 Like
#2983
  1. Increasing the block size limit -> BCH
  2. Decreasing the fees and tx malleabitlity got removed.
  3. Segwit enabled 2-Layer solutions.
  4. No, they are not. Some nodes might still support the old way.
1 Like
#2984
  1. Block size increase
  2. Segwit improved transaction malleability which made it easier to deploy the lightning network
  3. Segwit made second layer solutions possible like smart contracts
    4 No they are not forced to use segwit
1 Like
#2985

  1. What was a proposed alternative to Segwit?
    -The alternative proposal is to increase the size limit of a tx block.

  2. What did Segwit solve more than just the scaling issue?
    -They also solved the issue of tx malleability.

  3. How is Segwit and the Lightning network connected?
    -Segwit supports the second-layer protocol, like the lightning network

  4. Are people, wallets and other services forced to use Segwit?
    -No, it is not forced.

1 Like
#2986
  1. What was a proposed alternative to Segwit?

One of the proposed alternatives was to increase the block size to 2mb instead of 1mb wich would increase the number of transactions per block.

  1. What did Segwit solve more than just the scaling issue?
    it solved the problem of the transaction malleability, this flaw allow a change to be made in the transaction id (and subsequent hash) but not the content. this would prevent the application of 2nd layer protocols and smart contracts.

  2. How is Segwit and the Lightning network connected?
    Segwit made lightning network possible with 2nd layer solutions

  3. Are people, wallets and other services forced to use Segwit?
    No.

1 Like
#2987

  1. A proposed alternative to SegWit was to increase the block size beyond 1MB, however this solution only pushes the problem further down the road and does not solve the scaling problem.

  2. Another problem SegWit provided a solution to was that of transaction malleability. By storing the signature information separately from the base transaction block, the transaction ID remains immutable and the number of transactions on the block can be increased.

  3. The Lightning network is a layer on top of Bitcoin that enables fast and cheap transactions that are eventually settled to the Bitcoin network.

  4. There has been a gradual uptake of the SegWit update, with the percentage of transactions using SegWit steadily increasing year by year. The soft fork nature of the update means transactions using the original Bitcoin protocol are still compatible.

1 Like
#2988

1.Alternative to Segway was bigger blocks
2. By segregating the signature from the transaction block the issue of transaction signature malleability was fixed
3 as a second layer solution, lightening network was possible with signatures removed
4 segwit is a choice

1 Like
#2989

What was a proposed alternative to Segwit?
Bigger blocks
What did Segwit solve more than just the scaling issue?
TX Malleability was solved (signature)
How is Segwit and the Lightning network connected?
Lightning network is a second layer solution
Are people, wallets and other services forced to use Segwit?
No. it is a choice.

1 Like
#2990
  1. What was a proposed alternative to Segwit?

Increase the block size so more transactions could fit into each block.

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

Transactions malleability and fast 2nd layer (lightning network)

  1. How is Segwit and the Lightning network connected?

Segwit made 2nd layer protocols like lightning network easier to implement and use.

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

Nope, Segwit is a soft fork, means it allows the new version to get along with the old original version.

1 Like
#2991

Segwit Reading Assignment
1- increasing the block size.
2- Transaction malleability, so now even someone changed the signature the transaction ID won’t get affected.
3-By fixing the malleability issue with the Transaction made any feature that relied on unconfirmed transactions less risky and easier to design.
4-NO

1 Like