Segwit Reading Assignment

Blockchain and Bitcoin 101
#3454
  1. One proposed idea was to increase the size of the blocks.
  2. It made second layer protocols possible, and increased the level of complexity allowed for smart contracts.
  3. By settling or holding TXs off block until users are ready seems to be in the same spirit of making Segwit work/keeping blocks to 1 mb and innovating solutions to do this without creating a hard fork in the network.
  4. No because old transactions can still be used/soft fork.
1 Like
#3455

  1. The proposed alternative to segwit was increasing the block size, which resulted in a hard fork aka Bitcoin Cash.

  2. Aside from scaling, segwit solved the ability to develop layer 2 solutions such as Lightning Network and solved the transaction malleability issue.

  3. Lightning network is a layer 2 solution built on top of Bitcoin, which was only made possible by implementing segwit.

  4. No. users are not forced to use segwit. They have the option to use the upgraded protocol solution, or the original.

1 Like
#3456
  1. Raising the transaction mb from 1 to 2
  2. transaction malleability
  3. the lightning network is a second layer protocol that segwit made possible
  4. No because old transactions can still be used making this a soft fork
1 Like
#3457
  1. Increase block size to 4 MB instead of 1 MB
  2. Malleability as well as further support for other second layers solution such as lightning network and smart contract.
  3. Segwit makes second layer solutions feasible, such as Lighting network.
  4. No, old transactions are still within the set of rules.
1 Like
#3458
  1. Increasing the block size with proposals of 2MB, 8MB, or even 32MB, one such alternative being BitcoinCash.
  2. It stopped Transaction Malleability and added the ability to develop layer 2 solutions, such as Lightning Network.
  3. Segwit made second layer protocols, such as the lightning network possible, by offloading small transactions off-chain, only settling on the bitcoin blockchain when the users are ready.
  4. No, Segwit is a soft fork, so that new blocks can still be processed by old nodes on the network, i.e. users have the option of using either.
1 Like
#3459

bhai reheat kids ho?

#3460

A proposed alternative to SegWit was an increase in block size (which also lead to a hard fork, Bitcoin Cash).

SegWit solves the transaction malleability and lower fees along with supporting a second layer solution.

Second Layer solutions like Lightning Network were difficult to make happen due to the transaction malleability issue. Since Segwit resolves this issue, second layer solutions are possible.

No, this is a soft fork where the blockchain and network could continue despite the change. However, wallets are adding SegWit support.

1 Like
#3461
  1. To increase the block size
  2. The possibility to change the Transaction ID outside of the block (malleability)
  3. as a 2nd layer on top of Bitcoin.
  4. Nope. Still compatible with old protocol
1 Like
#3462

Yes you are right :sweat_smile: got it in the next section :grin:

#3463

  1. A proposed alternative to Segwit was to increase the block size to 2MB, curent is 1MB.

  2. Segwit solves also the tx malleability issue.

  3. Solving the tx malleability issue, Segwit supports development for the second layer protocols like Lighting network.

  4. Being a soft fork nobody is forced to make any changes, but in time everyone will adopt it because it has been accepted by over 51% of the network.

1 Like
#3464

  1. The main alternative for Segwit was increasing the block size. This resulted in a hard fork for Bitcoin cash.

  2. Segwit solved transaction malleability by separating the witness signature.

  3. Since Segwit improves scalability it allows for easier implementation of layer 2 solutions like the lightning network.

4.Segwit resulted in a soft fork which means users/wallets aren’t required to implement Segwit.

1 Like
#3465

  1. What was a proposed alternative to Segwit?
    the proposed alternative was to simply increase the block size.

  2. What did Segwit solve more than just the scaling issue?
    Segwit also solves the problem of signature malleability.

  3. How is Segwit and the Lightning network connected?
    Segwit supports the second layer solution by making unconfirmed transactions less risky. Lightning is much faster because it can verify transactions by querying a larger node instead of keeping that information itself.

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

1 Like
#3466
  1. What was a proposed alternative to Segwit?

Bitcoin Cash which offered larger block size.

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

It opened up for experimentation on a second layer, sped up transaction time, and fixed transaction malleability.

  1. How is Segwit and the Lightning network connected?

It’s a second layer protocol that the segwit upgrade made possible. This protocol allowed smaller more frequent transactions to move off chain until the users were ready.

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

No. This upgrade was a softfork, however, most wallets are upgrading to support this upgrade.

1 Like
#3467

  1. One proposed alternative was to increase the block size which would create a hard fork. This happened with the creation of Bitcoin Cash (BCH).

  2. SegWit fixed transaction malleability. Transaction Malleability allowed the receiver of a transaction to modify the sender’s signature (while maintaining the transaction’s inputs and outputs) which changed the transaction’s ID and the subsequent hash.

  3. The malleability fix introduced in SegWit allowed for the development of a second layer of protocols like the lightning network. The lightning network increases Bitcoins transaction capacity by taking frequent, small transactions off-chain. These transactions can later be settled on the blockchain when users are ready.

  4. No, as this is a soft fork people, wallets and other services are not forced to upgrade immediately.

1 Like
#3468

  1. A proposed alternative to Segwit was to simply increase the block size limit

  2. Segwit solved the scaling issue by allowing more transactions to be placed into the block, but also the malleability issue, so that no one could change small details and thus result in a changing transaction ID. This made the chain more secure.

  3. Segwit helped make the lightning network or second similar second layer solutions possible.

  4. No, as other services are not forced to use Segwit and can still use the old protocol.

1 Like
#3469
  1. What was a proposed alternative to Segwit?

bigger blocks
2. What did Segwit solve more than just the scaling issue?
The transacction malleability
3. How is Segwit and the Lightning network connected?
It connects the second layer protocol
4. Are people, wallets and other services forced to use Segwit?
No

1 Like
#3470

1. What was a proposed alternative to Segwit?

Block size limit has been increased, and a reading assignment has been assigned.

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

It also addressed transaction maliability, which enabled anyone to make small changes to a transaction after it had been submitted in order to update the transaction ID.

3. How is Segwit and the Lightning network connected?

The lighting network is an application built on top of the bitcoin network that could have been vulnerable to attacks if segwit had not been introduced

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

No, not all nodes have been updated; the Soft Fork requires CORE transactions to continue to be validated on the Bitcoin Blockchain.

1 Like
#3471

  1. What was a proposed alternative to Segwit?
    Increasing Blocksize

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

  3. How is Segwit and the Lightning network connected?
    Segwit made it possible to make second layer protocols

  4. Are people, wallets and other services forced to use Segwit?
    No, because it is a soft fork. It may take time for every wallet to implement Segwit.

1 Like
#3472

  1. What was a proposed alternative to Segwit?
    To increase the blocksize limit.

  2. What did Segwit solve more than just the scaling issue?
    It also solved the problem with tx malleability, where one could alter the unique tx id of a transaction by changing the signature. This meant that unconfirmed transactions could not be relied upon to exist until they were confirmed.

  3. How is Segwit and the Lightning network connected?
    The lightning network takes frequent, small transactions off-chain and so fixing the malleability issue makes this effort much simpler since you don’t have to account for the fact that txs may cease to exist if someone alters the signature.

  4. Are people, wallets and other services forced to use Segwit?
    No. It is a soft fork and both rule sets can coexist.

1 Like
#3473

  1. What was a proposed alternative to Segwit? Block weight increase the block size

  2. What did Segwit solve more than just the scaling issue? Transaction malleability. Full blocks, Expensive on chain transactions

  3. How is Segwit and the Lightning network connected It supports a second layer protocol, such as the lightning network.

  4. Are people, wallets and other services forced to use Segwit? No they are not forced, because Segwit is a soft fork.

1 Like