Segwit Reading Assignment

Blockchain and Bitcoin 101
#482
  • What was a proposed alternative to Segwit? An increase to the block size
  • What did Segwit solve more than just the scaling issue? it solved transacion malleability.and it also supports the development of second layer protocols.
  • How is Segwit and the Lightning network connected? The lighning network is a second layer protocol, so Segwit supports it´s development.
  • Are people, wallets and other services forced to use Segwit? no they´re not forced but slowly all are implementing it.
1 Like
#483
  1. Increase in block size to 2 mb.
  2. Transaction malleability
  3. By Segwit supporting so called second layer protocols. That means the bitcoin network incorporates small, frequent transactions beyond the original blockchain.
  4. No, it’s a soft fork.
1 Like
#484

  1. Increase the allowed size of a confirmed block in MB.

  2. it also solves the problem of Malleability.

  3. Segwit’s implementation has allowed features like lightning network to exist because of its support for Second layer protocols.

  4. No, this update was fundamentally a Soft Fork.

1 Like
#485
  1. Increasing the block size.
  2. Transaction malleability - The ability to alter the TXid by manipulating the signature.
  3. Lightning network is a secondary layer which improves the speed of transactions. It was made possible by Segwit.
  4. No, Segwit is not mandatory, but it is gradually being integrated by wallets and other services.
1 Like
#486
  1. What was a proposed alternative to Segwit?

The proposed alternative to SegWit was increasing the blocksize to 2MB. (Bitcoin Cash)

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

Segwit fixed transaction malleability. Where receivers could adjust their signature changing the hash. SegWit inhibits the ability of bad actors to scam unsuspecting users of the network.

  1. How is Segwit and the Lightning network connected?

Lighting network is a second layer solution that allows users to submit transactions offline. A lump some of transaction can then be uploaded to the blockchain at a later date. With transaction malleability removed, Lightning can now ensure the transaction hash’s haven’t changed in their offline state. This makes the upload of stored transactions reliable, ensuring the advancement of Lightning development.

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

No, as SegWit is a soft update.

1 Like
#487

  1. Increasing the block size limit, which is what BCash did.

  2. Transaction Malleability: It took the transaction signature out of the transaction, thus the Tx ID would remain unchanged if someone changed the signature (since the signature is no longer part of the inputs that make up the Tx ID / hash). So if someone changes the signature, the Tx ID remains the same thus it can still be located on the blockchain and go “sorry Bob, I did send you that 1 BTC, see?”

  3. The lightning network takes frequent, small transactions off-chain (so it relies on unconfirmed transactions) - Segwit, taking the signature out and mitigating Tx Malleability risk, also mitigates risk for any upgrades that rely on unconfirmed transactions, such as Segwit.

  4. No - since it was a soft fork, it was backwards compatible.

1 Like
#488

1: An increase in block size
2: It also solves the malleability issue by moving the sig off the blockchain and allowing a greater number of transactions per block.
3: Segwit introduced block weight. As per the article, this is a mashup of the block size with and without the signature data, and is capped at 4MB. I’m still not 100% clear on this and will do more research.
4: No, but it seems that adaptation was growing gradually at the time that the article was written.

1 Like
#489

  1. What was a proposed alternative to Segwit?
    Bitcoin Cash (increase max. block size)

  2. What did Segwit solve more than just the scaling issue?
    Problem of Malleability by taking the input signatures out of the transaction

  3. How is Segwit and the Lightning network connected?
    Segwit supports second layer protocols - lightning is one of them

  4. Are people, wallets and other services forced to use Segwit?
    Since this was a soft fork, no

1 Like
#490

What was a proposed alternative to Segwit?
increase the block size of btc.

What did Segwit solve more than just the scaling issue?
segwit increase the amount of tx to fit in a btc block and SegWit fixed transaction malleability by removing the signature information

How is Segwit and the Lightning network connected?
SegWit supports the development of second layer protocols, such as the lightning network.

Are people, wallets and other services forced to use Segwit?
no, the legacy tx is still in use

1 Like
#491

What was a proposed alternative to Segwit?
Increased block size, which happened with BCH hard fork.
What did Segwit solve more than just the scaling issue?
It solved transaction ID malleability, also enabled second layer solutions
How is Segwit and the Lightning network connected?
Lightening ng network is a second layer solution to Segwit.
Are people, wallets and other services forced to use Segwit?
No they can still use the older version but without the benefits of increased translations and transaction I’d malleability etc…

1 Like
#492

  1. What was a proposed alternative to Segwit?
    Increasing the block size (which bitcoin cash did)

  2. What did Segwit solve more than just the scaling issue?
    It allowed for layer 2 scaling solution compatibility later down the road, aloowed cheaper fees since we can fit more transactions in the 1mb bloock now that signatures where moved from the transaction data, made propagating block easier, therefor its less likely to create orphan blocks, and it fixed transaction malleability.

  3. How is Segwit and the Lightning network connected?
    Segwit fixed transaction malleability, so that now second layer applications do not need to worry about signatures being modified on new blocks and causing orphan blocks.

  4. Are people, wallets and other services forced to use Segwit?
    No, as a soft fork you can continue to use software from the first block that hasnt been mofified. for example, the first bitcoin wallets out there (non segwit wallets) can still operate in network with segwit enabled wallets

#493
  1. An alternative was a hard fork to increase the block size from 1MB to 2MB.
  2. Segwit also solved the Malleability exploit.
  3. Lightning network will take “frequent, small transactions off-chain, only settling on the bitcoin blockchain when the users are ready”.
  4. No, old transactions can be used as well.
1 Like
#494

1/ The proposed alternative was to increase the size of the block to 2MB. This eventualy gave the hard fork BitcoinCash
2/ It also solved the transaction malleability which prevented 2nd layer solution
3/ Segwit solve security issues to allow 2nd layer solution to work
4/ No, they are not forced to

1 Like
#495
  1. To increase the blocksize to 2mB.
  2. It resolved an issue with transaction malleability. It also expanded the second layer use of Bitcoin.
  3. The Lightning network is designed to speed up transaction times. It is ob a second layer of the Bitcoin protocol.
  4. No
1 Like
#496

  1. What was a proposed alternative to Segwit?
    -> increasingthe block size

  2. What did Segwit solve more than just the scaling issue?
    -> buy solving transaction malleability it made unconfirmed Tx’s less risky

  3. How is Segwit and the Lightning network connected?
    -> it made second layer solutions possible such as Lightning Network

  4. Are people, wallets and other services forced to use Segwit?
    -> No, the Segwit update was a softfork so all old adresses still work

2 Likes
#497

  1. Instead of separating the transaction data and the signature, the alternative to SegWit was to increase the block size.

  2. A - to some people, a flaw in the system called “transaction ID malleability”. This also made it easier for developers to add second layer protocol solutions such as lightning network.

  3. SegWit supports a second layer protocol, such as the lightning network.

  4. No they don’t. This is because it is a soft fork.

2 Likes
#498

true story :upside_down_face: :rofl:

1 Like
#499

• What was a proposed alternative to Segwit?
An alternative would be just a block size increase.
• What did Segwit solve more than just the scaling issue?
It also solved the transaction malleability issue (changing the hash of a Tx after it was done) by removing signature from the transaction and therefore from the Tx Id
• How is Segwit and the Lightning network connected?
SegWit supports the development of second layer protocols, such as the lightning network.
• Are people, wallets and other services forced to use Segwit?
No it was a soft fork and other wallets are adding it slowly. People who refused to adopt Segwit have done a hard fork and created new currencies.

2 Likes
#500
  1. Block size increase.
  2. The issue of transaction malleability.
  3. Segwit supports the development of second layer protocols. The fixing of the malleability issue also made any feature relying on unconfirmed transactions less risky and easier to design.
  4. No, since it’s a soft fork and older nodes are still present and working in the network.
1 Like
#501
  1. A hard fork proposing block size increase
  2. Transaction ID malleability - i.e. higher security for transactions as well as ease of implementing lightning network
  3. It has enables lightning network
  4. It’s a soft fork but more wallets are integrating Segwit support. Old addresses and transactions are still valid.
1 Like