Segwit Reading Assignment

Blockchain and Bitcoin 101
#3914
  1. Block size increase
  2. It solves the Transactions ID malleability issue (viewed as a minor bug), also it boosted development work on other features such as Bitcoin Smart contracts (MAST), Schnorr signatures (which would enable another transaction capacity boost) and TumbleBit (an anonymous top-layer network).
  3. Segwit helped make Lightning network possible, or to unleash the transaction capacity per second.
  4. No it was a soft fork, the Segwit feature was not mandatory to run the blockchain.
1 Like
#3915

  1. Another alternative to Segwit that was proposed was to increase block size - an idea which later led to bitcoin cash

  2. In addition to transaction speed, scalability and fee reduction, Segwit provided transaction malleability which allowed signatures and scripts to be changed without altering the transaction ID

  3. The transaction malleability provided by Segwit allowed second layer protocols like the Lightning network, due to reducing the riskiness of features that rely on unconfirmed transactions and making them easier to design

  4. Individuals and entities were not forced to use Segwit during the slow adoption process, because it was a soft fork which was compatible with the old protocol, and even now exists as an optional alternative for those seeking the benefits of malleability

1 Like
#3916
  1. A hard fork update that would increase the size of blocks.
  2. Segwit also reduces transaction time and fees.
  3. Segwit birthed the lightning network. It made it possible for second layer protocols.
  4. No, wallets have to add the capapbility.
1 Like
#3917

What was a proposed alternative to Segwit?

Alternative was to increase the size of the blocks

What did Segwit solve more than just the scaling issue?

It did solve the issue of transaction malleability that in turns let the introduction of second layer of
the bitcoin blockchain

How is Segwit and the Lightning network connected?

Segwit actually enabled bitcoin network supports the development of second layer protocols. Lightning Network is a second layer protocol. The lightning network further boosted 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. Since this is a soft fork, old transactions can still be used.

1 Like
#3918

  1. Increase the size of the block.

  2. It solved the issue of transaction malleability.

  3. Segwit made it possible to support the development of a second layer of protocols such as the lightning network.

  4. No. Even after the introduction of Segwit a hard fork of the Bitcoin called Bitcoin Cash was creates as another coin. Wallets had to adapt.

1 Like
#3919
  1. To increase the block size.
  2. The issue of transaction malleability.
  3. The Segwit update made second layer solutions possible to build on bitcoin, such as the Lightning network.
  4. No ,since it is a soft fork it is optional.
1 Like
#3920
  1. What was a proposed alternative to Segwit?
  • A larger block size limit, more than the 1 mB current limitation
  1. What did Segwit solve more than just the scaling issue?
  • Transaction Malleability, allowing anyone to change the transaction ID (and the subsequent hash) but not the contents of a transaction.
  1. How is Segwit and the Lightning network connected?
  • Leveraging the implementation of Segwit, second layer protocols like the lightning network can be built expanding the features bitcoin can be used.
  1. Are people, wallets and other services forced to use Segwit?
  • No, since Segwit is a soft fork update in the bitcoin protocol.
1 Like
#3921

1.
By Increasing the Block size to fit in more TX

2 - 3.
It solved the Transaction Malleability by removing the signature data from the transaction wish in turn cant change the hash id of the TX, so the TX gets less risky. It also support second layer protocols built on like lightning network or MAST.

The Lightning network is a layer 2 payment product built on the Bitcoin blockchain, its reduces the time by creating a payment channel between users wish in turn can be used hundreds, thousands or even much more, as long as the channel is open, when the channel is closed by broadcasted to the BTC blockchain so the miners validate the signature to add the block. This takes less time and less and less fees to get to the blockchain. It is also secure because the as long as there are balance to cover the TX and fees it will remain open and the the whole process is full transparency.

4.
No they are not, because its is a soft fork and the old btc protocal is still valid,
But more and more implemented the Segwit and by now its kinda normal in wallets and exchanges.

1 Like
#3922
  1. What was a proposed alternative to Segwit? Just increasing the block size
  2. What did Segwit solve more than just the scaling issue? It also solved transaction malleability
  3. How is Segwit and the Lightning network connected? Segwit made second-layer solutions, like the lightning network, possible by solving transaction malleability
  4. Are people, wallets and other services forced to use Segwit? No
1 Like
#3923

  1. Bitcoin cash which is a fork of bitcoin was created out of resistance for Segwit.

  2. Segwit solved transaction malleability, boosted MAST development, Schnorr signatures, and TumbleBit.

  3. Segwit was planned to make more room in a block. Lightning network boosted the capacity of transactions. Both complement each other to help the Bitcoin chain run smoother.

  4. No, but major wallets and exchanges are working to implement Segwit into a soft fork.

1 Like
#3924
  1. Increase the block size
  2. transaction malleability
  3. Segwit allow second layer protocol which is the lightning network
  4. no. Is a soft fork. So it is still compatible with the older protocol.
1 Like
#3925

1.A bigger block
2. the Problem with malleability
3. SegWit supports the development of 2nd layer protocols which is the lighting network.
4. Segwit is a softfork and people, wallets and other services are not forced to use it, although many are adopting

1 Like
#3926

1.blocksize increase/bitcoin cash
2.tx malleability which makes for lower fees and more second layer solutions.
3.segwit supports second layer solutions such as the lightning network to be built ontop.
4.no as it is a soft fork old TX and wallets can still be used.

1 Like
#3927

  1. A proposed alternative was an increase in block size that also lead to a hard fork.

  2. Apart from the scaling issue, SegWit solves the transaction malleability as well as lower fees along with supporting a second layer solution.

  3. SegWit supports the second layer solution which is the lightning network.

  4. No, it is a soft fork.

1 Like
#3928

  1. The proposed alternative to Segwit was to implement a larger block size limit rather than change transaction structure, therefore a hard fork, Bitcoin Cash was developed.

  2. Segwit fixed a malleabilty issues that made any feature that relied on unconfirmed transactions less risky and easier to design.

  3. It supports the development of second layer protocols such as the lightning network as they are compatible with the previous protocol.

  4. They are not required to. Many people, wallets and other services are working on it and expect to upgrade, which could lead to an uptick in both usage and additional functionality experimentation.

1 Like
#3929

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

  2. What did Segwit solve more than just the scaling issue?
    It got rid of the signature within the block which solved the transaction malleability problem

  3. How is Segwit and the Lightning network connected?
    I helped make second layer solutions (lightning network, mark contracts) possible.

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

1 Like
#3930

  1. The proposed alternative was to simply increase the block size.

  2. apart from scaling Segwit removed the risk for transaction malleability.

  3. sigwit facilitates smaller transactions off-chain between peers without adding transactions to the block in the bitcoin base layer, this enables to increase the transaction throughput per second.

  4. No,people are not forced to use segwit, however, segwit is an upgrade( soft fork) that increases the number of transactions per block and also removes the risk of transaction malleability.

1 Like
#3931

  1. Increase in the block size

  2. Txn malleability

  3. Say you go to a mall and then to the food court and say the food court doesn’t accept any form of payments such as cash, CC or mobile wallets. The only way to buy food from there is to buy a food card and load it with 10BTC. Now you can go to any food outlet in the food court, buy what you wanna eat and pay with the loaded card. Say you spend 1BTC at every outlet and 9BTC in total. You have 1BTC left in your card. Now you go to the card loading counter, present the card and get the refund of 1BTC.

This is exactly how Lightning network works. You and your friend can agree on a wallet balance, carry multiple txns with the balance between you both and lastly you both account the txns and decide on who gets to keep the remaining balance.

Segwit made Lightning network possible by removing the threat of Txn malleability.

  1. Its a choice
1 Like
#3932

  1. To increase the size of the blocks, as BCH has done, by creating a hard fork on the blockchain.

  2. Segwit upgrade is intended to eliminate the hard fork by not increasing the block height but adding new space in the blocks by deleting the signature on the TX’s. This solved the issues related to full blocks height (reducing the size of each block) and also the malleability of the hash (TX ID) that comes from changing the signature on the TX.

  3. After fixing the malleability issue, the Lightning protocol could work for fostering transactions. LN is an alternative that allows users to make private transactions without the block confirmation time by using a smart contract scripting language that is interconnected to the blockchain network.

  4. Not necessarily, the adoption of the upgrade is not mandatory but it’s been strongly promoted by offering lower fees and faster transactions to those who adopt the new protocol.

1 Like
#3933

1- The alternative to Segwit was upgrading the size of the block.
2- Segwit solves the transaction malleabitily issue and allows lower the fees
3- Segwit made possible the development of 2nd layer solution like Lightning Network and others
4- No, it was a soft fork

1 Like