-
a proposed alternative was increasing block size instead of changing transaction structure which lead to a hard fork creating bitcoin cash.
-
it took signatures out of the block and removed a bug which would allow to change the signature.
-
SegWit supports the development of second layer protocols, such as the lightning network. the malleability fix made any feature that relied on unconfirmed transactions less risky and easier to design.
-
no, as it is a soft fork update.
1 Like
- What was a proposed alternative to Segwit?
-To increase the block size. - What did Segwit solve more than just the scaling issue?
- Segwit solved the TX malleability issue by removing the TXID’s.
- How is Segwit and the Lightning network connected?
-Segwit made 2nd layer protocols like the Lightning network possible. - Are people, wallets and other services forced to use Segwit?
- No, because it was a soft flork.
1 Like
- What was a proposed alternative to Segwit?
An alternative that was proposed to Segwit was an increase in blocksize - What did Segwit solve more than just the scaling issue?
SegWit also solved transaction malleability - How is Segwit and the Lightning network connected?
Lightning network is a second layer solution / protocol which builds on segwit. Both together can make millions of transactions per second instead of 7 to 10 per second on the old network. - Are people, wallets and other services forced to use Segwit?
No they are not as older nodes are still present, however 95% of the network has adapted segwit
1 Like
Increasing the block size from 1mb to 2mb
Transaction malleability
Segwit helped reduce malleability which then in turn made any feature that relies on unconfirmed transactions less risky and easier to design/implement such as the lightning network.
Yes it was a soft fork so once a majority upgrades others are forced to adopt the change.
1 Like
- To increase the blocksize (more mb)
- It solved the transaction malleability issue by removing the tx signatures from the tx datastructure
- It now support 2nd layer solutions like the Lightning network
- No, it’s a soft fork but they start using it whenever they want
1 Like
-
To increase the block size.
-
It solved the issue with transaction malleability as well.
-
Segwit supports the development of second layer protocols, such as the lightning network.
-
No. But as more and more wallets embrace the upgrade the usage of segwit will increase over time.
1 Like
-
Increasing the max block size limit to 2 MB
-
Transaction malleability, a method of changing a tx’s hash # by altering the signature.
-
Segwit enhanced the security of unconfirmed transactions so that more features could be built around them (like lightning network).
-
No, you can keep making blocks with signatures as long as they stay under 1 MB, however you won’t be able to mine as many transactions and thus are incentivized to adopt it.
1 Like
-
What was a proposed alternative to Segwit?
To increase the block size limit. -
What did Segwit solve more than just the scaling issue?
SegWit also solved the transaction malleability bug. TX malleability allowed a transaction signature to be modified without changing the transaction content. -
How is Segwit and the Lightning network connected?
SegWit supports the development of second layer protocols, such as the lightning network. Together they will allow millions of transactions per second in the bitcoin network. -
Are people, wallets and other services forced to use Segwit?
No. However, most of the wallets have integrated SegWit support, and the use of SegWit is continuously to increasing.
1 Like
1- To increase the size of every block in the chain
2- The malleability issue it was having
3- With out the segwit update lightning would not have been able to effectively build on top of the bitcoin blockchain
4- No, they can use one of the hard forks of bitcoin, like bitcoin cash if they wish to not have use in segwit
1 Like
-
That the block size be increased to 2mb
-
It also fixed tx malleability.
-
It enabled second-layer protocols to be safer and easier to design.
-
It is an optional upgrade since it is a soft fork.
1 Like
1.) One proposed alternative to Segwit was to increase the transaction block size limit from 1MB to 2 MB, though this created more potential problems than it solved. One such problem was that it would greatly increase the time it takes for a transaction to propagate across the entire network. This, in turn, would have a cascading series of undesirable consequences: longer transaction times, higher transaction fees, and increased hardware requirements for full nodes. The more sophisticated hardware requirements may have caused a significant number of full nodes to drop from the network, which would have been detrimental to network security.
2.) In addition to the scaling issue, Segwit fixed a non-critical bug related to transaction malleability. Prior to Segwit, a sender “Judy” might have sent a recipient “Kevin” 1.0BTC. When Kevin received the transaction, before it was confirmed, he could alter the private key signature of the transaction. This would cause the transaction ID hash to change. Kevin would then notify Judy that he never received the funds (even though he did), and when Judy searched a blockchain explorer for her Transaction ID, she wouldn’t be able to find it because it doesn’t exist anymore - it was changed by Kevin before the transaction was confirmed. As a result, Judy might send Kevin another 1.0BTC, even though he had already received the money from the original transaction. Segwit fixed this by removing the Transaction ID hash from the transaction data structure itself. The private key signature is still malleable, but changing it will no longer change the Tx ID hash.
3.) Segwit supports the development of 2nd layer capabilities such as the Lightning network, which is a layer-2 scaling solution for Bitcoin.
4.) Because Segwit was a soft fork of the bitcoin network, people, wallets, and other services are not required to use it. It’s been several years now since implementation began, and adoption has become much more mainstream. Those who were against Segwit when it was proposed forked off into Bitcoin Cash, which opted to increase block size limit rather than adopt the new transaction data structure.
1 Like
1. What was a proposed alternative to Segwit?
1.A. It was proposed to increase the block size to solve the running out of space issue from 1mB to 2mB. However, this would also only be a temporary fix and would soon fill 2mB size.
2. What did Segwit solve more than just the scaling issue?
2.A. Segwit solved the Tx malleability also by removing the signatures outside the base Tx block. This keeps the Tx layer intact and Hash the same.
3. How is Segwit and the Lightning network connected?
3.A. Segwit solving the Malleability issue made it less risky to perform 2nd layer Tx channels on Bitcoin to increase Tx throughput.
4. Are people, wallets and other services forced to use Segwit?
4.A. This was additional Soft Fork function that removed signatures from the base tx block, so wallets, nodes and services where not forced but was optional as mining nodes would still accept blocks whether they had updated to the SegWit protocol or not.
1 Like
- An alternative to Segwit that was proposed was an actual hard fork update that would increase the actual block size as opposed to “kicking the can down the road.”
- In addition to the scaling issue, Segwit solved the problem of transaction malleability transaction malleability whereby anyone could change small details/modify the transaction id (and therefore its hash), but not the transaction content itself. Where 2nd layer protocols and smart contracts were unavailable before they now became possible. 3. Segwit and the Lightning network are connected in the fact that the lightning network is now built off of Segwit. Supporting second layer protocols, built on expanded understandings enabled by the ability to separate the Transaction ID, the lightning network can now take frequent, small transactions off-chain and only settle when users are ready.
- People, wallets, and other services are not forced to use Segwit. As this was a soft fork adoption is required and has been a process. Furthermore, for those who did not agree with that direction more generally, one choice presented has been to follow an actual hard fork (whereby they increased the block size) and thus ultimately created a new coin, Bitcoin Cash.
1 Like
1. What was a proposed alternative to Segwit?
A proposed alternative to Segwit was to increase the maximum block size (capacity) of BTC. Bitcoin cash which is a hard fork of Bitcoin chose that alternative.
2. What did Segwit solve more than just the scaling issue?
Segwit has also solved the transaction malleability issue (where tx signatures could be modified, affecting the tx ID in the process) by removing signatures from transaction data structure.
3. How is Segwit and the Lightning network connected?
The malleability fix brought by Segwit made layer 2 solutions possible such as Lightning network.
4. Are people, wallets and other services forced to use Segwit?
No. People, wallets and other services are not forced to use Segwit which explains why the rollout of the upgrade is moving slowly.
1 Like
1: Increasing the block size.
2: It prevented transaction ID malleability, reduced fees and it supports the development of second layer protocols.
3: The lightening network takes small, frequent transactions off-chain, increasing bitcoins transaction capacity.
4: No, but many have incorporated it at this point.
1 Like
- What was a proposed alternative to Segwit?
A larger block size limit made possible by a hard fork (as BCH has done)
- What did Segwit solve more than just the scaling issue?
It supports the development of second layer protocols, such as the lightning network, and also boosted development work on other features such as MAST (which enables more complex bitcoin smart contracts), Schnorr signatures (which would enable another transaction capacity boost) and TumbleBit (an anonymous top-layer network).
- 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. 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.
- Are people, wallets and other services forced to use Segwit?
No
1 Like
-
A proposed alternative to increase the current block size.
-
Segwit also fixed the issue on transaction malleability.
-
The fact that Segwit solved the issue on transaction malleability, it enabled Lightning network to be built on top of the current network (2nd-layer protocol).
-
No. People, wallets and other services are not forced to use Segwit.
2 Likes
1 to size up the block size.
2. It solved the problem with Transaction malleability
3. Segwit support the second layer solution (lightening network)
4. No its a soft fork
1 Like
- Increase in block size to >1MB is a proposed alternative to segwit.
- Segwit is a patch to fix transaction malleability, Segwit makes blockchain lighter and allows more transactions to be processed and this doesn’t increase the transaction fee.
3.Lightning network allows users to set up private micropayment channels. users do transactions and these are unconfirmed which doesn’t go to blockchain network. After pament channel is closed all these transactions go to the blockchain network.
Segwit makes lightning network work because, without segwit users could alter the transaction id thus by making use of TX malleability and this would collapse the lightning network.
4.Segwit is soft fork update which doesn’t force system to get updated. Its completely induvidual choice to acknowledge and adopt.
1 Like
1. What was a proposed alternative to Segwit?
To increase the block size. That would only be a temporary solution and not fix transaction malleability.
2. What did Segwit solve more than just the scaling issue?
Transaction malleability, by removing the signature from the transaction data structure
3. How is Segwit and the Lightning network connected?
Segwit made it possible for the development of second layer protocols such as Lightning Network.
4. Are people, wallets and other services forced to use Segwit?
No because it is compatible with old protocols, it is a soft fork.
1 Like