Segwit Reading Assignment

Blockchain and Bitcoin 101
#3173

  1. Increasing the block size.

  2. The txs malleability and lower fees.

  3. Makes second layer possible

  4. No

1 Like
#3174
  1. What was a proposed alternative to Segwit?

An increase in block size.

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

Segwit solved the problem of transaction malleability by putting the transaction ID outside the block.

  1. How is Segwit and the Lightning network connected?

Segwit allowed layer 2 solutions such as Lightning to be developed.

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

No, it was a soft fork and uptake is gradual.

1 Like
#3175
  1. To increase the block size.
  2. Segwit fixed the transaction malleabillity by removing the signature information and storing it outside the base transaction block. With that, signatures and script can be change without affecting the transaction ID.
  3. Segwit supports the development of second layer protocols, sucg as the lightning network. The malleabillity fix made any feature that relied on unconfimed transactions less risky and easier to design.
  4. No
1 Like
#3176

  1. Increasing cap for block size

  2. It solves transactions malleability through taking signature out of block

  3. Lightning network creates layer on top of bitcoin which wouldn’t be possible without segwit as it was more risky and harder to design

  4. No, it’s soft fork

1 Like
#3177
  1. Increasing the block size
  2. It stoped TX malleability.
  3. SegWit is that it supports the development of second layer protocols, such as the lightning network.
  4. No
1 Like
#3178

  1. Two proposals for Segwit alternatives were increasing the block size and a hardfork i.e. Bitcoin Cash.

  2. Segwit not only solved the scalability issue, it also solve transaction malleability. Before Segwit, signatures were part of the transaction block. Each block had a signature with a unique transaction id. Hypothetically, someone can change a signature that would change the transaction id.

3.Segwitt allowed second layered development such as the Lightning network.

  1. Its a soft fork so no its optional.
1 Like
#3179

What was a proposed alternative to Segwit?
increasing the block size which would have been a hard fork

What did Segwit solve more than just the scaling issue?
a security issue with transaction malleability

How is Segwit and the Lightning network connected?
segwit allows btc to be able to function in smart contracts and second layer solutions
using the transaction ID’s

Are people, wallets and other services forced to use Segwit?
no they are not, infact many didnt and they formed a fork called Bitcoin cash

1 Like
#3180
  1. What was a proposed alternative to Segwit?
    A proposed alternative to Segwit was to increase the block size to 2 mb.
  2. What did Segwit solve more than just the scaling issue?
    Segwit beside the scalloing issue solved the Tx Malleability which was a flaw that enabled user to make small changes to the signature of a Tx which changed the hash of that Tx.
  3. How is Segwit and the Lightning network connected?.
    By the adoption of Segwit it enabled second layer protocols one of which is the Lightning network which also facilitates the increase of capacity that Bitcoin needed by taking small Tx off-chain.
    4.Are people, wallets and other services forced to use Segwit?
    People are not forced to use Segwit but from my understanding of it it is highly incentivized to do so but it is also a matter of adapting wallets to the update which could require new hw.
2 Likes
#3181
  1. 2MB block size increase
  2. solved transaction malleability issue since signature is stored separately and Tx hash is same even if signature changes.
  3. SegWit supports the development of second layer protocols with Lightning as one example
  4. No as being a softfork
1 Like
#3183

  1. The proposed Alternative to implementing Segwit was to increase the size of the 1mB blocks.

  2. Segwit also solved the problem of transaction malleability. Which helped make the network more secure. Users are no longer able to change the transaction ID with Segwit.

  3. Segwit allows for the support of second layer protocols such as the lightning network.

  4. No one is forced to use Segwit because it is still compatible with the old protocol. It would be a soft fork.

1 Like
#3184

*** What was a proposed alternative to Segwit?**
Increasing the block size, such as the fork of Bitcoin Cash.

*** What did Segwit solve more than just the scaling issue?**
Transaction malleability, which allowed alteration of the transaction id.

*** How is Segwit and the Lightning network connected?**
By solving the issue of transaction malleability, this made features that rely on unconfirmed transactions more secure, which enabled the integration of lightning network.

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

1 Like
#3185
  1. What was a proposed alternative to Segwit?
    To increase the block size to 2MB that would have led to an hard fork
  2. What did Segwit solve more than just the scaling issue?
    It solved also TX Malleability by taking out the signature from the TX content
  3. How is Segwit and the Lightning network connected?
    The malleability fix made any feature that relied on unconfirmed transactions less risky and easier to design enambling the support of the development of second layer protocols
  4. Are people, wallets and other services forced to use Segwit?
    No
1 Like
#3186

  1. A proposed alternative was to increase the block size. This would have required a hard fork.

  2. Segwit also solved the issue of transaction malleability, which was a flaw that allowed people to change signature info and modify the transaction id. It accomplished this by storing the signature information somewhere outside of the block.

  3. The fix to transaction malleability also made it easier to design layer 2 protocols which allowed for the development of the lightning network.

  4. No. There are still functioning wallets that don’t support segwit.

1 Like
#3187

1)What was a proposed alternative to Segwit?
To increase size of a block

  1. What did Segwit solve more than just the scaling issue?
    It solved malleability, nobody then could change data inside transactions (ID)

3)How is Segwit and the Lightning network connected?
Segwit made possible to use lighting network by solving malleability so then can be payment channels established. Transactions goes back and forth on this chanel and is written only at the beginning and the end. Transactions goes fast are cheep.

  1. Are people, wallets and other services forced to use Segwit?
    No, they could use the other solution of increasing size of block. (Bitcoin cash)
1 Like
#3188
  1. What was a proposed alternative to Segwit?

The alternative proposed to solve the scaling problem of bitcoin was to make a Hard Fork in order to enlarge the size per block.

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

Segwit solves the scaling issue by reducing the size of each transaction. The update removed the sign from the transaction structure and stored it outside the transactions. Therefore this update also solves the malleability problem because now it’s impossible to change the hash of one transaction by changing the sign.

  1. How is Segwit and the Lightning network connected?

The update Segwit allows the development of protocols on top of the blockchain. Lightning network is one protocol that was developed on top of the blockchain protocol that makes quicker transactions.

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

Every wallet, person and service that uses the bitcoin protocol can use Segwit or not. The decision to accept the update and run it, depends on each node. The adoption of the Segwit update has been growing since the release and it appears that will continue according to an article published by Beigel Ofir at 99bitcoins.

1 Like
#3189 
1.	What was a proposed alternative to Segwit?

Increase the allowable size of blocks

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

  • lower fees

  • helped prevent the stall of adoption

  • relieved the TX malleability problem

    1. How is Segwit and the Lightning network connected?

SEGWIT supports the development and implementation of Lightning network as a second layer protocol. Because of the malleability fix enabled by SEGWIT protocols that operate using unconfirmed transactions are made less risky and easier to design.

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

No, as far as I understand the adoption was not simultaneous. Up to the individual NODES when and if to adopt. Falls under a soft fork.

1 Like
#3190
  1. Block size increase was an alternative to Segwit.
  2. Segwit solved the block malleability issue.
  3. Segwit implementation supports second layer protocols like the Lightning network.
  4. People, wallets, nor other services are forced to use Segwit. According to the article, the rollout was moving slowly (as of February 22, 2018) with gradual adoption by wallet providers.
1 Like
#3191
  1. Increasing the block size limit from 1mB to 2mB, which led to the hard fork creating Bitcoin cash.
  2. Transaction malleability.
  3. Segwit allowed for the development of layer 2 protocols, which includes the lightning network.
  4. No, Segwit created a soft fork.
1 Like
#3192
  1. increasing the block size to 2mB.
  2. the malleability issue with the signatures
    3.segwit supports the lightning network on a second layer.
  3. No there is not a forced use of segwit it is a soft fork.
1 Like
#3193

A proposed alternative to Segwit was to increase the block size which has led to the hard-fork of Bitcoin Cash.

  • Malleability-issue
  • Support of 2nd layer protocols (e.g. lightning network)
  • boost development work (MAST=smart contracts; Schnorr signatures; Tumble Bit)

Segwit supports 2nd layer protocols so Lightning network can do its magic (takes frequent, small transactions off-chain and settling on bitcoin once user is ready).

No, since it’s only a soft-fork.

1 Like