- Increase block size to 2 mB
- Transaction malleability
- Segwit supports second layer protocols such as Lightning Network and soving the malleability made transactions less risky.
Alle lightining transactions are made outside the blockchain and the tx are only set on the blockchain when the users are ready.
4.No, segwit seperated the signatatures from the tx id’s but you can still run the blockchain on the old way
1 Like
1.) A proposed alternative to segwit was to increase the allowed block size to 2mb.
2.) Other than the scaling issue, segwit also corrected an issue known as transaction malleability. This was a bug that allowed someone to change the transaction ID, and thus the hash of the block (not the data).
3.) By removing the signature (witness) from the block, segwit makes second layer solutions, such as the lightning network, possible.
4.) No one is forced to use segwit.It is a soft fork, which means it is compatible with the previous protocol.
1 Like
1. What was a proposed alternative to Segwit?
Increasing the blocksize.
2. What did Segwit solve more than just the scaling issue?
Transaction maleabillity.
3. How is Segwit and the Lightning network connected?
Segwit made second layer solutions (like LN) possible.
4. Are people, wallets and other services forced to use Segwit?
No. It’s optional and transactions in the old format are still accepted.
1 Like
Increase the max size of blocks from 1mB to 2mB.
By removing the signature from the transaction segwit fixed the malleability and opened door to second layer solutions which rely on unconfirmed transaction.
Lighting network is an off-chain scaling solution for bitcoin which became supported by applying the segwit.
No, there are not as long as there are older nodes on network, which they can be as it is softfork update.
1 Like
*A proposed alternative to Segwit was to increase the block size.
*Segwit solved some problems in Bitcoin. One of them being the ability for the recipient of a transaction to be able to change the transaction ID which could result in the recipient stating that they had never received the Bitcoin sent. The sender would check the chain and would not be able to find their transaction as the transaction ID had been changed and would therefore either re-send the transaction or not receive the service paid for.
*Segwit and Lightning are connected in so far as the Lightning network could not exist without Segwit as it relies on unconfirmed transactions.
*The network does not need to update their node to include the version which includes Segwit - however, in 2018 40% of the network had upgraded to include Segwit and this increases daily.
1 Like
- One alternative to segwit is to increase block size.
- It solves the transaction malleability.
- Segwit support the second layer protocol which created the lightning network.
- No.
1 Like
- increasing the block size but this would cause a hard fork and split community
- segwit solved transaction malleability where someone could change small details that modified the transaction id
- it is connected because segwit supports second layer protocols like the lightning network
4.no they just are able to implement it because it is not a hard fork on BTC protocol
1 Like
-
An alternative would be to increase the block size.
-
Segwit solved the TX Malleability issue.
-
Segwit enabled second layer solutions to be incorporated on the BTC blockchain.
-
As Segwit is a soft fork, each node on the network can use either the previous chain or the one incorporated with Segwit.
1 Like
- Alternatively to SegWit, increasing the block size to 2Mb was proposed.
- It fixed the transaction malleability issue.
- SegWit is enabling second-layer development like Lightning network cause it’s making features based on unconfirmed transactions less risky and easier to program.
- No, but some actors wanted to rule the scaling problem with increased block size and forked the Bitcoin network into the creation of Bitcoin Cash.
1 Like
- What was a proposed alternative to Segwit?
Increasing the block size to 2MB - What did Segwit solve more than just the scaling issue?
transaction malleability and how to integrate 2nd layer solutions - How is Segwit and the Lightning network connected?
Segwit enables second layer solutions - Are people, wallets and other services forced to use Segwit?
No
1 Like
- To increase the tie of the block.
- The transaction malleability. By removing the signature information and storing it outside of the transaction block.
- SegWit supports the development of second layer protocol like lightning network, which increase Bitcoins transaction capacity and making it less risky.
- No, it’s a soft fork. Old addresses and transactions can still be used.
1 Like
-
raising the block size to 2MB
-
transaction malleability
-
segwit allows to use solution as lightning network because lightning network works with unconfirmed transactions from the mempool. Before segwit when there was a possibility to tamper with unconfirmed but broadcasted transaction´s signature, using of lightning network was very risky. Segwit removes this risk from the unconfirmed transactions because the signature is not part of hte transaction anymore.
-
No. Segwit was a soft fork and there are probably some nodes in the network that did not update. However, because the block size did not increase above 1 MB, even these not updated nodes can validate new blocks and work with them as a part of blockchainn, as they still fit to the old 1MB limit. These not updated nodes can even mine because their blocks will fit to 1MB according the original rule.
1 Like
- as some part of comunity didnt agree with segwit project, one of the alternatives was to increase the size of the blocks.
2.segwit solve the tx malleability.
3.segwit support second layer protocols as lightening network - well, people are not forced to use segwit as it isnt yet implemented or upgraded by all wallet companies, or nodes and because it’s a soft fork
1 Like
to increase the block size.
It solved a flaw called “transaction malleability”, that allowed recipients to make the senders think that a payment was not done and trying to make the sender submit a new transaction (basically paying twice).
This was simpy done by modifying the transaction so that it’s ID changed and and the sender was not able to find the transaction any more.
Although this basic scam scenario is possible, it is not very realistic (you don’t want to have a lot of work just to scam people). The bigger issue was that this flaw hindered further development of more sophisticated features (e.g. second-layer protocols and smart-contracts) relying on unconfimed transactions.
There is no real connection except that SegWit solves the “transaction malleabilty” and the lightning network relies on that security issue beeing solved. So you can say that SegWit enabled the secure use of second-layer protocols (like lightning network).
No, they are not forced,
but maybe fooled by the changed commands used in the script (but this was not the question 
…)
1 Like
- What was a proposed alternative to Segwit?
Increasing block hieght to 2mb instead of 1mb a hard fork. - What did Segwit solve more than just the scaling issue?
malleibility taking out hash id sig. - How is Segwit and the Lightning network connected?
segwit allows a secondlayer softwear ex lightning network= decrease the amount of smaller transactions in the block “off-block” for later consenses. - Are people, wallets and other services forced to use Segwit?
No, it is still compatible with the previous protocol.
1 Like
-
What was a proposed alternative to Segwit?
A proposed alternative to SegWit was to increase the block size limit. This is how Bitcoin Cash got started. -
What did Segwit solve more than just the scaling issue?
Apart from the scaling issues being solved with SegWit, it also fixed the transaction malleability problem where it was possible to change the transaction hash by interfering with the signature. By separating the signature from the rest of the transaction data, it became impossible to change the transaction hash because the signature was no longer apart of the hash. -
How is Segwit and the Lightning network connected?
SegWit is the foundation of the Lightning Network. Because SegWit removed the possibility of transaction malleability, protocols such as the lightning network were implemented, allowing for the bitcoin network to eventually process millions of transaction per second. -
Are people, wallets and other services forced to use Segwit?
No. People, wallets, and other services are not forced to use SegWit. There are still legacy nodes operating without SegWit by adhering to bitcoin’s original protocol.
1 Like
- Increase the block size.
- It solved the transaction malleability issue.
- Segwit makes the second layer possible.
- No. The old protocol can still be used.
1 Like
What was a proposed alternative to Segwit? The alternate solution was to increase the block size to allow a greater quantity of transactions per block but this posed the question whether it would require a new upscale later in time when the same circumstances arise.
What did Segwit solve more than just the scaling issue? The initial intention of Segwit was to fix the issue of transaction´s malleability which allowed anyone to change small details that modified the transaction id (and the subsequent hash) but not the content, giving the opportunity to intentionally take advantage over user´s good faith and pose confirmed transactions as if never happened.
How are Segwit and the Lightning network connected? Segwit supports the development of second layer protocols like Lightning which further boost bitcoin’s transaction capacity by taking frequent, small transactions off-chain and settling on the bitcoin blockchain only when the users are ready, based on the fact that the malleability fix made any feature that relied on unconfirmed transactions less risky and easier to design.
Are people, wallets and other services forced to use Segwit? No, this was not a hardfork but its adoption is becoming larger in time.
1 Like
[1.] What was a proposed alternative to Segwit?
To increase the block size pass the 1MB limit.
[2.] What did Segwit solve more than just the scaling issue?
It also solved the problem of the Transactions ID hash value being tied to more than just the transactions in the block, but also to the signature or witness information that was in the same block. Hence, this caused the Transactions ID value to change when there was any alteration to the signature information since it was in the same block. The problem was solved by removing the signature information from the base 1MB block and placing it into a separate area called the extended block. Hence any changes to the signature information thereafter no longer impacted on the Hash value of all of the transactions (Transaction ID) since signature information was no longer included in the base block with the transactions.
[3] How is Segwit and the Lightning network connected?
They are connected by the 2nd layer protocol of the lightning network relying on the soundness of the layer one protocol. The layer one protocol had the problem with the transaction hash and this was fixed by Segwit.
[4] Are people, wallets and other services forced to use Segwit?
No they are not since the fork that occurred was a Soft Fork (No splitting of the blockchain occurred).
1 Like
- What was a proposed alternative to Segwit?
- bitcoin cash - increasing blocksize
- What did Segwit solve more than just the scaling issue?
- removing signatures from the tx hash simplifying the block solving tx malleability with a second layer
- How is Segwit and the Lightning network connected?
segwit creates bridge to lightning network by keeping trans id info on side chain that includes signatures that can be changed without messing with the tx hash - Are people, wallets and other services forced to use Segwit?
no
1 Like