Segwit Reading Assignment

[Synthesi]

1. Increase block size. (AKA Bitcoin Cash)

2. It also solved transaction malleability problem.

3. Segwit allowed for transactions to be temporarily settled off-chain. The Lightning Network is considered a “second-layer” solution.

4. It is a choice to use Segwit. The previous version is still supported.

[mzepeda]

1. increasing the block size
2. it solved the signatures and transaction malleability
3. Segwit allows a second layer protocol to be built and the lightning network is one of them.
4. no they are not but Segwit allow for more transactions and faster transaction. they become cheaper as well the more people join.

[Stormingfox]

@filip

1. What was a proposed alternative to Segwit?
2. What did Segwit solve more than just the scaling issue?
3. How is Segwit and the Lightning network connected?
4. Are people, wallets and other services forced to use Segwit?

1. To increase the blocksize

2. It solved Transaction Mailability, in that the signature was separate from the transaction, and thus you could not change the the Hash by messing with the signature.

3. Segwit allowed for second layer protocols like the Lightning network.

4. No, there older nodes are still present on the network which do not implement it

[RJG_101]

1. What was a proposed alternative to Segwit?
   A proposed alternative to SegWit was to increase the block size cap

2. What did Segwit solve more than just the scaling issue?
   In addition to the scaling issue - SegWit solved a security+speed issue - SegWit allowed signatures, data that is required to verify all transactions, to be moved away
   from the transaction block. This allows for signatures and scripts to be altered (maintaining a a real time log) independent of transaction ID.

3. How is Segwit and the Lightning network connected?
   SegWit and the lightning cable are connect by the malleability fix. In separating signatures and transaction ID - stores of once verified signatures can remain off-site.
   When small yet consistent transactions are occurring regularly - these transactions can be taken off-chain until both parties are ready. Thereby increasing network performance
   while maintaining security and verification

4. Are people, wallets and other services forced to use Segwit?
   In 2018 the answer was no because miners, nodes, service providers were still updating. Now in 2022 the answer is basically yes and no (with an emphasis on yes). While on the the bitcoin network SegWit is the ruling structure, however some nodes still run pre-SegWit coding. If users are not comfortable with SegWit they can use other forms of crypto including Bitcoin Cash

[Jenski]

1. increasing block size

2. transaction malleability

3. segwit supports second layer solution , lightning network is a second layer solution

4. no its optional, but the usage is increasing

[Juraicg]

1. What was a proposed alternative to Segwit?
   A larger block size limit

2. What did Segwit solve more than just the scaling issue?
   Transaction malleability, and an allowance of second-layer protocols

3. How is Segwit and the Lightning network connected?
   the lightning network is a second-layer protocol that will help increase bitcoins transaction capacity

4. Are people, wallets and other services forced to use Segwit?
   no, it’s a soft fork

[Michael_Courtney]

1. What was a proposed alternative to Segwit? A hard fork called Bitcoin Cash.

2. What did Segwit solve more than just the scaling issue? It erased the potential for tx malleability and decreased the tx size.

3. How is Segwit and the Lightning network connected? Segwit made it easier to design on top of the chain by fixing malleability issues making is safer.

4. Are people, wallets and other services forced to use Segwit? No, but by using segwit it reduces fees and make it more appealing for second layers to build on.

[Ahmad_Abd_Allah]

1. What was a proposed alternative to Segwit?

• Increase the block size to 2MB.

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

• Segwit resolved the TX malleability

3. How is Segwit and the Lightning network connected?

• SegWit supports the development of second layer protocols, such as the lightning network.

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

• No, it’s softfork

[petertreepeter]

1. Increase the block size.
2. Tx malleability and enables creating a second layer protocols.
3. Segwit allowed Lightning network to be deployed as a second layer solution.
4. no, as it was a soft fork.

[hmpbkj]

1. What was a proposed alternative to Segwit?
   Increase block size limit from 1 to 2 mB.

2. What did Segwit solve more than just the scaling issue? TX malleability by removing signature from the TX.

3. How is Segwit and the Lightning network connected? Segwit helped to create Lighting network.

4. Are people, wallets and other services forced to use Segwit? No.

[Bafana18]

1. A block size increase and the removal of a signature to secure the transaction and preventing double spending.

2. It solved transaction id malleability and block size issue.

3. Segwit support the lightning network L2 solution possible with boosting bitcoin transaction with frequent and small transactions off chain and it helps bitcoin settles its blockchain.

4. NO.SegWit is a soft fork and big wallets are adding SegWit support and it still falls within the rules and updates and old protocols.

[giriniem]

1.Increase of block size
2.It solved transaction malleability by taking signature out of tx
3.Lighting network is possible because of segwit
4.No, it’s a soft fork

[Lecocrypt]

1. To increase the blockzise from it’s limit of 1mb
2. transaction malleability
3. made 2nd layer protocols possible
4. No

[Florian]

1. Increasing the block size (how happened at Bitcoin Cash e.g.)

2. It also solved the so called transaction malleability, it was a bug who made it possible to change little parts of the transaction id.

3. Without Segwit layer-2-solutions like the Lightning network wouldn`t be possible. Especially the risk at the transation point was decreased by Segwit.

4. No

[SAINTPATRICK]

1. Increase blocksize
2. Transaction ID malleability which allows easier deployment of lightning network.
3. It helped usher in the Lightning network
4. No, its a softfork that falls within rulers before the update took place.

[Fima]

1. What was a proposed alternative to Segwit?
   A: To increase the transaction size.
2. What did Segwit solve more than just the scaling issue?
   A: It solved transaction Malleability.
3. How is Segwit and the Lightning network connected?
   A: Lightning is a second layer solution designed for fast transactions.
4. Are people, wallets and other services forced to use Segwit?
   A: No, it’s a soft fork.

[mariustoft]

1. An increase in block size.

2. Separated the signature aka witness from the block transaction itself. Therefore making block size smaller.

3. Segwit makes it possible to use second layer protocols such as the lightning network.

4. As is was a soft fork people were not forced. Only if it was a hard fork.

[Pyot]

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?
   It solved the malleability issue

3. How is Segwit and the Lightning network connected?
   Segwit supports the development of seconf layer protocols such as the lightning network.

4. Are people, wallets and other services forced to use Segwit?
   No. Old TX can still be used.

[Jan1]

1. What was a proposed alternative to Segwit?
   -Increase the block size to fit more transactions in 1 block.
2. What did Segwit solve more than just the scaling issue?
   Malleability to change the signature hash of a transaction. This is not possible anymore because the signatures are not stored in the transactions anymore.
3. How is Segwit and the Lightning network connected?
   This allowed Lightning Network to function since it takes transactions off chain and relies on transaction ids. If they can change in the bitcoin network, lightning could never be sure to find the right block or hash again.
4. Are people, wallets and other services forced to use Segwit?
   No they are not. It is not a hard fork which separates the chain. Segwit introduced a new mashup between block size and height called weight.which allows up to 4mB including the signature. So you could still send transactions.

[ViseraDelMuerte]

1 The proposed alternative to Segwit was to increase the block size with a hard fork.

2 Segwit fixed transaction malleability by removing the signature information and storing it outside of base transaction block. Signatures and scripts can be changed without affecting the transaction ID.

3 Segwit and the Lighting Network are connecte4d by Segwit’s ability to reduce the size of transactions, allowing for more transactions to be processed at once, and the Lighting Network’s ability to facilitate faster, cheaper, and more secure transactions.

4 No, people, wallets, and other services are not forced to use Segwit. It is an optional upgrade that can be used to reduce transaction fees and improve transaction speed.