Segwit Reading Assignment

Blockchain and Bitcoin 101
#522

  1. The alternative proposal in the article was the implementation of an increased block size, which then became Bitcoin Cash, through a Hard fork.

  2. It solved the transaction malleability issue that led to secure the network further.

  3. It made what the lightning network is built upon work, it made second layer solutions possible.

  4. No there is no forcing of Segwit implementation but there are many nodes that want, and is going to implement it.

1 Like
#523

  1. Increasing the block size

  2. The issue of transaction signature malleability

  3. The Segwit update makes it possible for the lightning network to operate on btc

  4. no

1 Like
#524
  1. Increasing the block size from 1mb.
  2. Prevented BTC malleability.
  3. The lightning network was built using a second layer protocol.
  4. Yes, if they want to use BTC or Lightning.
#525

  1. What was a proposed alternative to Segwit?
    Another proposal before Segwit was adopted was to double the block size from 1MB to 2MB

  2. What did Segwit solve more than just the scaling issue?
    In addition to scaling, Segwit solves the transaction malleability problem, an issue where it was possible to change the transaction hash by altering transaction signatures.

  3. How is Segwit and the Lightning network connected?
    Segwit fixes transaction malleability, and in turn for Lightning to work uses double signed blockchain transaction Ids. Had Segwit not fixed the transaction malleability, transaction Ids could be tampered with causing Lightening to fail.

  4. Are people, wallets and other services forced to use Segwit?
    No. It is a softfork.

1 Like
#526

The proposed alternative to segwit was to increase block size limit.

  1. Segwit solved tx malleability which increased security.
    3.fixing the malleability issue, it made it easier to develop the lightning network
    4.No, segwit was a soft fork
1 Like
#527

1 adapt the maximum block size

2 malleability

3 segwit supports the development of a second layer of protocol

4 no directly , indirectly with time yes…

#528

  • What was a proposed alternative to Segwit?
    A hard fork increasing the block size limit, which resulted in Bitcoin Cash

  • What did Segwit solve more than just the scaling issue?
    It also solved the problem of transaction malleability by excluding the signature data from the block. Although the signature is still utilized outside of the block for validating the transaction, it is not used as part of the input for hashing the block.

  • How is Segwit and the Lightning network connected?
    Because Segwit fixed the transaction malleability issue, the lightning network enables 2nd layer protocols which allows smaller transactions to be made offchain securely until ready to be added to the main network.

  • Are people, wallets and other services forced to use Segwit?
    No. It is a soft fork which means that an upgrade was not necessary to remain in the original network

1 Like
#529
  1. What was a proposed alternative to Segwit?

Bigger block size (1MB to 2MB)

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

Solved the problem of transaction malleability or the ability to change the Transaction ID while leaving the transaction information intact.

  1. How is Segwit and the Lightning network connected?

Segwit allowed for a more secure network with higher throughput. This gave Lighting the means to innovate on the platform.

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

They are not forced to use Segwit but chances are, they are already by not running their own full node.

1 Like
#530

  1. A block size increase. Which eventually did happen in the hard fork (BCH)

  2. It solved the transaction maleability issue. People were no longer able to go in the transaction to change the id before it was confirmed. Which was an issue because it changed the hash output of each transaction.

3.Segwit made unconfirmed transactions much more secure which allowed for the development and application of 2nd layer protocols, lightning network being one of them.

  1. No. this was a soft fork. The BTC network is still slowly updating even today.
1 Like
#531
  1. The proposed alternative to Segwit was a block size increase, which eventually resulted in BCH.
  2. Segwit also solved the transaction malleability issue, that hindered more complex developments such as smart contracts, which encompassed second-layer solutions such as Lightning.
  3. Segwit enables the rollout of the Lightning network.
  4. Because there was a soft fork, Segwit is not required to be used.
1 Like
#532
  1. The alternative to segwit was to simply increase the block size
  2. Segwit prevented a hard fork on the blockchain, helping to keep tx fees down, maintaining tx speeds and preventing malleability
  3. Made relying on unconfirmed transactions less risky
  4. No as it is a soft fork
1 Like
#533

1- To increase the size of the blocks.
2- It solved transaction malleability and lower fees
3- Segwit supports second layer solution.
4- No because it a soft forks.

1 Like
#534
  1. Increasing the block size.
  2. Malleability
  3. It made a lighting network possible
    4 no they are not
1 Like
#535
  1. What was a proposed alternative to Segwit?

Increase the block size, but that would eventually have the same results. (BCash)

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

TX malleability + lower fees + It added another layer called “Lightening Network” first introduced in LTC

  1. How is Segwit and the Lightning network connected?

Off chain transaction can happen faster because they’re signed off chain

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

Trezor, Ledger and others have adopted. its a soft fork and later wallets need to be updated if they want to use it.

1 Like
#536

  1. A proposed alternative to Segwit was a block size increase which would have resulted in a hard fork.

  2. Segwit solved the tx malleability issue as well as the scaling issue.

  3. The Segwit update supports development of the Lightning Network as a second layer protocol that increases the Tx capacity by taking smaller Txs off-chain.

  4. No because the soft fork by definition does not result in the expansion of the rule set.

1 Like
#537

  • What was a proposed alternative to Segwit?
    Increase the block size to speed transaction time.

  • What did Segwit solve more than just the scaling issue?
    It also solved the transaction malleability issue.

  • How is Segwit and the Lightning network connected?
    Segwit supports a second layer solution like Lightning Network.

  • Are people, wallets and other services forced to use Segwit?
    No, one can still do the transactions without segwit.

1 Like
#538

  1. What was a proposed alternative to Segwit?
    Block size increase and will reach limitation of 1 MB

  2. What did Segwit solve more than just the scaling issue?
    fixed transaction malleability via removing the signature information of transaction

  3. How is Segwit and the Lightning network connected?
    removing signature, decrease block size, so lightning network can handle

  4. Are people, wallets and other services forced to use Segwit?
    No, it’s soft fork. transaction with signature are still supported

1 Like
#539
  1. The alternative to Segwit was to increase the block size.
    • Segwit also solved the problem of transaction malleability.
      3 - Segwit allowed for multiple second layer possibilities, including lightning.
    • Segwit is a soft fork so they are not forced to use it.
1 Like
#540
  1. The increase in block size from 1 MB to 2MB. This would have resulted in an hard fork, that is what happened with Bitcoin Cash
  2. It resolved the malleability hack through which it was possible to modify the signature to “steal funds”. By moving the signature outside the main-chain this is not possible anymore
  3. The Segwit update made second layers on the main chain easy to develop and less risky thus allowing the development of the Lighting network, a second layer protocol con top of Bitcoin’s main chain
  4. No, they are not. Segwit is a softfork, meaning that everyone is free to adopt the new block structure/language. The adoption has been growing steadily but still a minority of wallets are adopting Segwit.
1 Like
#541

  1. An alternative to segwit that was proposed was to increase the block size. However this does not solve the problem of increasing block size in the future and challenges of a hard fork.

  2. Segwit also solves the problem of transaction malleability.

  3. by making transaction malleability less risky using segwit, it was possible to include second layer protocols like lightning network. The lightning network boosts the bitcoin transaction capacity by taking frequent and small transactions off-chain and only settle on the bitcoin blockchain when the users are ready.

4 Since it is a softfork users can choose not to use segwit while still remaining on the blockchain network

1 Like