Segwit Reading Assignment

[Gunnar]

1. A proposed alternative to Segwit was increasing block size, which some miners chose resulting in a hardfork forming BCH.

2. Segwit not only solved a scaling issue in the short term, but also fixed tx malleability issues.

3. Segwit makes second layer solutions easier to implement.

4. People, wallets, and other services are not forced to use Segwit because it was a softfork.

[Freddy]

1. To hard fork a larger block data size
2. It solves the problem with “Transaction Malleabillity” which means that you can alter the signature and get a compleatly new trasaction Hash.
3. It can boost the develop of Lightning Network and other second layer protocols.
4. Well, it is a soft forke, so they are not forced to update, but the useage is growing every day

[patrickamp]

block weight

malleability of tx’s

both are built on top of blockhain using same protocols

NO.

[Fairway]

1. to increase the block size (like bitcoin cash did).
2. a bug in the bitcoin code called transaction malleability.
3. Segwit enabled the lightning network by solving transaction malleability.
4. No, they are not. That’s why it roll out was very slowly.

[Ulrich]

1. Increasing the block size as an alternative. This leads to a hard fork like the Bitcoin Cash.
2. It fixed a bug where the signature data could be altered, preventing the rollout of further protocols that can run on top of Bitcoin.
3. By trimming the fat ( signature data ) off the 1mb block it allows for further protocols to run on top of Bitcoin, like smart contracts and off-chain small transactions like lightning network.
4. No, since there is no hard fork.

[jwpcn]

1. A hard fork which had as proposal a increase on the Blocks size.
2. Segwit update also fix the transaction malleability removing the user signature from the transaction.
3. Segwit makes the work with unconfirmed transactions less risky where lighting network is one of them.
4. Being a Soft Fork, Segwit didnt bring severe changes on the network consensus which means that previous nodes can avoid the update and still work.

[BitcoinAlchemist]

What was a proposed alternative to Segwit?
A hard fork to increase the block size.

What did Segwit solve more than just the scaling issue?
It enabled development of layer-two protocols and smart contracts.

How is Segwit and the Lightning network connected?
Segwit enabled Lightning Network implementation on the Bitcoin blockchain.

Are people, wallets and other services forced to use Segwit?
Since this is a soft fork, they are not forced to use Segwit. Users can run smaller Bitcoin nodes that don’t store signatures.

[Lena]

1. To make the blocks bigger.
2. The issue of transaction malleability.
3. Segwit made second layers possible.
4. No, old addresses and transactions can still be used, it’s a Soft Fork, wallets are adding SegWit
   support.

[sponur]

1.Alternative to segwit was to increase the block size 2MB

2.Segwit solved the block size issue by moving the signature off the block, this also solved the transaction malleability problem

3.Segwit and lightning are connected as they are both using a layer solution outside the transaction hashed block

4.Segwit is a soft fork so the network can still use the legacy system, so wallets and even exchanges do not need to use it

[LeCorb]

1. A hard fork resulting in an increased block size of 2MB
2. It resolved a security issue of maleability that was a security hole which allowed a bad actor to change a signature on a transaction thereby creating a double spending scenario.
3. The Segwit fork included a software update which included the creation of the Lightning Network layer.
4. Segwit was a soft fork so it did not require compliance. It gained compliance through voluntary adoption.

[hutch]

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?
   Transaction malleability, (The ability of recipients to change a transaction hash by changing the digital signature) - The signature issue was resolved by default as it is no longer part of the transaction and therefore does not change the transaction’s hash.

3. How is Segwit and the Lightning network connected?
   The Lightning Network is a second layer protocol which is easier to implement when using Segwit as prevention of transaction malleability is a primary requirement.

4. Are people, wallets and other services forced to use Segwit?
   No. Segwit was a soft fork and therefore not imposed on users. However, more wallets and services are implementing Segwit support.

[laketravisgirl]

1. An increase in block size.
2. The malleability problem.
3. SegWit supports second layer protocol development.
4. No.

[Dandy_Lau]

1. increase in block size limit (1mb to bigger)
2. transaction malleability issue
3. Segwit make 2nd layer protocol such as lightning network possible because it will only need to settle the transaction in main chain when needed.
4. Not necessary because it is a soft fork.

[maerchenprinz]

1. Another proposed alternative to Segwit was the block size increase.
2. Segwit also solved the issue of transaction malleability. By storing the signature outside of the transaction hash, once verified, the transactions not only become smaller in size, the ID also stays the same, should somebody attempt to change the signature.
3. Because now the transaction IDs can’t be changed anymore, second-layer solutions, such as the Lightning network, can rely on the IDs and work with them without having to wait for confirmation by miners.
4. SegWit is a soft fork, meaning that nobody has to use construct a segwit transaction in order to be accepted by the network. The incentive to implement SegWit, however, is substantial, due to the reduced transaction fees (sat/byte).

[akos.maksa]

1. What was a proposed alternative to Segwit?
The solution of Bitcoin cash was to increase the block size.

2. What did Segwit solve more than just the scaling issue?
It also fixed the transaction malleability issue i.e. modifying the transaction ID by making minor changes in the signature for example.

3. How is Segwit and the Lightning network connected?
Segwit enabled second layer protocols on Bitcoin such as the Lightning Network by fixing the transaction malleability issue.

4. Are people, wallets and other services forced to use Segwit?
No, they are not.

[richard]

1. increase block size (bitcoin cash)
2. allowed for the possibility of second layer solutions (lightning)
3. lightning facilitates cheaper transactions that ultimately integrate into the bitcoin blockchain in on final transaction.
4. no, segwit is backward compatible (soft fork).

[Gabrielita]

1. Increasing the block size to 2 MB.

2. The malleability issues with block ID signatures.

3. They both address the speed and cost issues but LN is an added layer.

4. No, so far it can be used on the wallets that offers SegWit support.

[chersflair]

What was a proposed alternative to Segwit?
Increased Block Size

What did Segwit solve more than just the scaling issue?
It removed the signature portion of the transaction
allowing for more transactions to be included in the 1MB blocks
and it removed the signatures from the transactions eliminating
malleability and changed Txn Hash

How is Segwit and the Lightning network connected?
The lightning network can increase 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?
Users are not forced but wallets and exchanges are using
the protocol

[ecbwong]

1. Not many people were happy with the Segwit adoption because the 1 MB block size was still maintained and to them the problem will surface up again eventually. So the proposed alternative was Bitcoin Cash, increasing the block size rather than to a new transaction structure.

2. Apart from scalability being solved by using Segwit, it also tackles the problem of transaction malleability issue where the scriptsig formerly can be altered and thus altering the TX id of the block. Since now the signatures of all the UTXOs are outside the block with Segwit, the transaction ID will not be tempered with. Furthermore, with the introduction of Segwit it supports the development of second layer protocols such as lighting network etc.

3)Segwit and Lighting networks are basically second-layer protocols.

4)Since Segwit is not a hard fork, anyone is free to choose whether to use Segwit enabled wallets or services. It runs concurrently with Bitcoin core network

[rodrigopacini]

1 Aumentar o tamanho dos blocos

2 O problema de maleabilidade das transações

3 O Segwit tornou possível soluções de segunda camada(second layer), como a Lightning Network. Devido ao fim da maleabilidade das transações, há maior segurança para implementação de soluções de segunda camada.

4 Não, pois foi um soft fork.