Segwit Reading Assignment

Blockchain and Bitcoin 101
#3334

  1. Increasing the size of the block

  2. Transaction Malleability

  3. The lightning network is a layer 2 scaling solution that can send transactions for little to no fees off-chain and then finalizes the data on-chain when users are ready.

  4. No. Not all wallers use Segwit.

1 Like
#3335
  1. What was a proposed alternative to Segwit?
    To increase the blocksize of each block in bitcoin. It had many problems to its solution however such as that it was not a long term fix and could create more problems for bitcoin in the future. At the rate at which bitcoin was growing we would continuously hit that limit needing to increase the block size again and again leading to more and more hard forks in the network which would decrease security and split the community. It would also require miners to get better, faster, and stronger hardware in order to compete with the mining power needed to mine these blocks bigger in size which would centralized the market in which we praised decentralization. Bigger blocksizes also mean longer propagation time which would lead to more stale blocks and more forks on the network creating inefficiency and wasted efforts.
  2. What did Segwit solve more than just the scaling issue?
    Other than the scaling issue segwit solved the problem of people exploiting transaction malleability allowing people to change the segregated witness of a file altering its hash but allowing the rest of the transaction to stay the same.
  3. How is Segwit and the Lightning network connected?
    Segwit supports the development of second layer protocols, such as the lightning network. This network will further boost bitcoins transaction capacity by taking frequent, small transactions off-chain, only settling on the bitcoin blockchain when the users are ready.
  4. Are people, wallets and other services forced to use Segwit?
    No, people, wallets and other services are not forced to use segwit. In fact from what i found it looks like there is currently only a 40% adoption since 2017 and it is moving very slowly. Also miners who are non believers of segwit have created a hard fork and created things such as bitcoin cash increasing the blocksize and splitting the community because they believes that was the correct path to go.
1 Like
#3336

  1. The alternative to segwit is known today as bitcoin cash and calls for bigger block sizes to hold more transactions in. block rather than segwits solution.

  2. Segwit also solved the malleability issue within bitcoin.

  3. Lightning network works to keep bitcoin transacting at a faster rate by taking more frequent and small transaction off chain to free up space in the current blocks.

  4. Not forced but recommended and as blockchain goes, the longest chain wins. With more hash power coming to segwits side they will follow suit and adapt.

1 Like
#3337

  1. Increase Block size limit

  2. Seg by taking frequent, small transactions off-chain wit solved Transaction Malleability by removing the transaction signatures

  3. by taking frequent, small transactions off-chain.

  4. No, many Programs do not have Segwit, some people find it a temporary fix.

1 Like
#3338

  1. One alternative solution to segwit was to increase the block size from 1mb to 2mb

  2. Segwit in addition to scaling transactions was malleability removal of signatures in transaction hash.

  3. Lighting network is connecting to segwit as a second layer, taking smaller transactions off chain to increase transaction per second for btc.

  4. Segwit did not force a upgrade it was a soft fork wherein the majority 51% of network upgraded to segwit

1 Like
#3339
  1. What was a proposed alternative to SegWit?

A proposed alternative was to increase the block size to 2MB.

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

SegWit allowed more transactions into the block, prevent the formation of a hard fork, and solved transaction malleability issues.

  1. How are Segwit and the Lightning network connected?

SegWitt and the Lightning network are connected because the Lightning network provides a second layer protocol by taking frequent small transactions off the chain and keeping them off the chain until the users are ready to complete their transactions. This helps to boost bitcoin transaction capacity.

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

There are some wallets and services that are presently not using SegWitt, but most wallets and other services are planning on implementing SigWitt which would force most people to use SigWitt.

1 Like
#3340
  1. Increase Block Size Limit
  2. Transaction Malleability
  3. supports development of second layer protocols
  4. No
1 Like
#3341
  1. What was a proposed alternative to Segwit?
  • Increasing the size of the block. That would have led to a hard fork.
  1. What did Segwit solve more than just the scaling issue?
  • Transaction malleability thus making the protocol more secure
  1. How is Segwit and the Lightning network connected?
  • The lightning network takes frequent, small transactions off-chain, only settling on the bitcoin blockchain when the users are ready.
  1. Are people, wallets and other services forced to use Segwit?
  • No. Part of the community hard-forked into BitcoinCashe
1 Like
#3342

1.To make the block size larger.

  1. Transaction malleability and faster second layer.

  2. Lightning network is a second layer and makes faster transactions.

  3. No

1 Like
#3343
  1. Merely doubling the block size.
  2. It solved the transaction malleability problem which allowed two separate transaction IDs for the same transaction.
  3. The lightning network would not work unless the transaction malleability problem was corrected.
  4. No. (Soft fork)
2 Likes
#3344

  1. A proposed alternative to Segwit was an increase in the Bitcoin’s block size limit as Bitcoin cash did.

  2. Segwit solved more than just the scaling issue by fixing the transaction malleability bug which made unconfirmed transactions less risky.

  3. Segwit made lightning, which is a second layer scaling protocol possible.

  4. No. People, wallets and other services are not forced to use Segwit because it was a soft fork.

2 Likes
#3345
  1. What was a proposed alternative to Segwit? - To increase the size of the block.
  2. What did Segwit solve more than just the scaling issue? - Yes, it got rid of transaction malleability.
  3. How is Segwit and the Lightning network connected? - Implementation of Segwit enables the development of the Lightning network, second layer protocols.
  4. Are people, wallets and other services forced to use Segwit? - No, only 14% of transactions were using Segwit in the beginning. Segwit is being adopted by not all at once.
2 Likes
#3346

  1. A proposed alternative to Segwit was to increase the size of each block.

  2. Segwit solved more than just scaling when it fixed transaction malleability by removing the signature and storing it outside the block.

  3. Segwit supports layer 2 protocol like Lightning with it’s malleability fix and the lightning network will keep smaller transactions off-chain until needed.

  4. No. As a Soft Fork, people, wallets and other services are not forced to use it as the old system is still in play, although it does provide cheaper fees. Bitcoin Cash and others forked and chose a larger block size so those also remain alternatives.

1 Like
#3347
  1. Increase the block size which is a hard fork e.g. Bitcoin Cash
  2. Transaction malleability or security and development of second layer protocols such as lightning network, other features such as smart contracts (MAST), transaction capacity boost (Schnorr signatures) and an anonymous top layer network (TumbleBit)
  3. The lightning network will further boost bitcoin’s transaction capacity by taking frequent, small transactions off-chain, only settling on the bitcoin blockchain when the users are ready.
  4. It is a soft fork but with more wallets adopting Segwit it will decrease fees and improve efficiency.
1 Like
#3348
  1. To just increase the block size.
  2. The malleability issue.
  3. Fixing the malleability bug made the lightning network possible.
  4. No.
1 Like
#3349
  1. Bitcoin Cash which has a greater block size.
  2. Transaction malleability
  3. It separated signature from transaction hashing to accommodate more complex features of Bitcoin such as smart contracts and second layer implementation (i.e Lighting network etc)
  4. It caused confusion since it seems that it is optional to adopt the new update. But since this was a soft-fork that means this is a non-democratic way to make the majority of the community support it in long term.
1 Like
#3350
  1. Increase Block size
  2. solved tx mailability
  3. made lighting network happen
  4. soft fork
1 Like
#3351

  1. Increasing the block size from 1mB to 2mB.

  2. It solved the malleability issue by removing the signature from the actual transaction

  3. Segwit adds the possibility of a second layer solution like the lightning network

  4. No, it’s optional and most likely some wallets today are not using it

1 Like
#3352
  1. What was a proposed alternative to Segwit?
  • Increase the size of each block
  1. What did Segwit solve more than just the scaling issue?
  • It solved the transaction malleability issue by removing the signature information from the transaction block.
  1. How is Segwit and the Lightning network connected?
  • Segwit made relying on unconfirmed transactions less risky and easier to design.
  1. Are people, wallets and other services forced to use Segwit?
  • No it’s not --> Soft Fork
1 Like
#3353

1 - A proposed alternative to Segwit was a hard fork with a larger block size (Bitcoin Cash)
2 - Segwit solved transaction malleability as it removed the signature (which was alterable) from the transaction hash
3 - Segwit reduced the risk of unconfirmed transactions which then enabled the use/development of second layer protocols (Lightning network)
4 - No - all users must choose to adopt Segwit as it was implemented as a soft fork

1 Like