Segwit Reading Assignment

[odesseus011]

1. What was a proposed alternative to Segwit?
   Larger block size.

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

3. How is Segwit and the Lightning network connected?
   The Segwit upgrade allowed for another development layer on top of the bitcoin blockchain, eg, the lightning network.

4. Are people, wallets and other services forced to use Segwit?
   They are not forced as this was a soft fork and wallets can adapt as required.

[SoyBoy]

1. What was a proposed alternative to Segwit?
a. To increase the block size cap
2. What did Segwit solve more than just the scaling issue?
a. It also solves the issue of transaction malleability
3. How is SegWit and the Lightning network connected?
a. The introduction of SegWit to the Bitcoin protocol opened the availability for the development of second layer protocols, such as the lightning network
4. Are people, wallets and other services forced to use SegWit?
a. No, since SegWit is a softfork update, old addresses and transactions can still be used. The adoption of the SegWit format currently resides at around 50%

[Ed1]

• What was a proposed alternative to Segwit?
  Expanding the block size.
• What did Segwit solve more than just the scaling issue?
  It also solved Mallability
• How is Segwit and the Lightning network connected?
  Segwit opened the possibility for a second layer such as lightning network
• Are people, wallets and other services forced to use Segwit?
  No, as this is a softfork

[Danny_Bradshaw]

The link is not working?

[enrico]

1. What was a proposed alternative to Segwit?
   to increase the maximum block size

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

malleability problem, which is related with the possibility to modify the signature resulting in a tx hash change and possible cheating

3. How is Segwit and the Lightning network connected?
   because segwit fix the malleability problem and it allows second layers protocols with unconfirmed transactions more reliable.

4. Are people, wallets and other services forced to use Segwit?
   the adoption is voluntary

[KennyMcCormick]

@filip

• What was a proposed alternative to Segwit?

increase block size.

@filip

• What did Segwit solve more than just the scaling issue?

tx mailability

[quote=“filip, post:1, topic:8408”]

• How is Segwit and the Lightning network connected?
  [/quote] (upload://sPxEFauWZYxcfGJRdzb0RIyQ48D.jpeg) ![image|32x32](upload://lfhD0ezoIq7S7a75MpZJxWkkQgt.png
  The segwit update tx maliablity enables second layer protocols like lighting network to run more securely on unconfirmed txs.

@filip

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

no because it was a soft fork

[laclaire]

1. What was a proposed alternative to Segwit?

The proposed alternative to Segwit was to simply increase the Blocksize.

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

SegWit also solved the transaction malleability problem.

3. How is Segwit and the Lightning network connected?

The SegWit malleability fix made any feature that relied on unconfirmed transactions less risky and easier to design supporting the development of second layer protocols, such as the lightning network. It also paved the way for the use of Smart Contracts.

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

No, SegWit is a SoftFork and its usage is optional.

[Margo]

1. What was a proposed alternative to Segwit?
The suggested alternative was to increase the block size.

2. What did Segwit solve more than just the scaling issue?
Seg with also solved the non critical bug of transaction malleability. It solved this bug by removing the signature witness id’s from the base block. This means that signature information called be changed without altering the tx id.

3. How is Segwit and the Lightning network connected?
As long as the transaction malleability bug existed it made it difficult to implement second layer solutions. Now that SegWith has solved the issue, it makes it easier for devs to design cool features on Lightning.

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

[rontrader9]

1. What was a proposed alternative to Segwit?

Increasing the block size up from 1MB

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

The malleability flaw issue which allowed users to change small details that modified the transaction ID (and subsequent hash) but not the content.

3. How is Segwit and the Lightning network connected?

Segwit allows 2nd layer protocols such as the lightning network to be less risky and easier to design

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

No

[jjohnson]

1. What was a proposed alternative to Segwit? to increase the size the the blocks to 2mb or more

2. What did Segwit solve more than just the scaling issue? it resolved the problem with tx malleability by removing the signature information from the tx block

3. How is Segwit and the Lightning network connected? Segwit helps with the second layer solution such as Lightning to work properly

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

[Changfa_Lin]

• What was a proposed alternative to Segwit?
  Bitcoin cash, implementation of the larger block size.
• What did Segwit solve more than just the scaling issue?
  Segwit solved the issue of transaction malleability too.
• How is Segwit and the Lightning network connected?
  Lightning network is built upon segwit.
• Are people, wallets and other services forced to use Segwit?
  No. it’s a soft fork.

[Crypto_James]

1. What was a proposed alternative to Segwit?

The alternative to Segwit was to increase the block size. Which lead to the hard fork that formed Bitcoin Cash.

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

Segwit solved a transaction malleability problem. You can now have the signature data outside the blocks and change that without effecting the transaction ID of the block.

3. How is Segwit and the Lightning network connected?

Segwit made second layer solutions possible which lead to the lightning network.

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

No, the old way can still be used without adding the signature information to the blocks.

[Rasselas_Wildcat]

@filip

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

1. Increased block size was suggested as another alternative.
2. Segwit also solved the transaction malleability issue.
3. Segwit allowed other 2nd layer protocols such as lightning. The malleability fix made any feature that relied on unconfirmed transactions less risky and easier to design.
4. No they are not obligated to, but it benefits them to do so. More and more implementation of Segwit is seen.

[RhoadsNRoses82]

1. Increased block size.
2. It solved the transaction malleability problem.
3. Lightning network would have been less secure if the transaction malleability problem was not resolved.
4. They are not forced to use segwit. Segwit is a soft fork. Even though the “block weight” increased to 4mb, the main block size remained 1mb, so there was no actual expansion of the ruleset which would require a hard fork.

[Edward_Valencia]

1. What was a proposed alternative to Segwit?
   Increasing the block size from the original 1MB.

2. What did Segwit solve more than just the scaling issue?
   It solved transaction maliability which allows the receiver to change the tx id and claim that they never received the payment.

3. How is Segwit and the Lightning network connected?
   By removing the address from the tx id, 2nd layer solutions allow reliability in unconfirmed transactions.

4. Are people, wallets and other services forced to use Segwit?
   No, they are allowed to continue to use the same structure. They accomodated this by creating ‘block weight’ and capping it at 4MB. Block weight includes the signatures of the tx. This avoids a hard fork, making it a soft fork.

[mabrouk]

1- Increase the block size.
2- Solved transaction malleability by removing signature from tx block.
3- Made possible to supports the development of second layer protocols, such as the lightning network.
4- No, it is a soft fork, however, wallets are adding SegWit support.

[slvrsrfr]

1. Increasing size of transaction block
2. It allowed for a greater number of transaction as the signature was segregated from the transaction block.
3. Segwit allows for Bitcoin to work on the Lightning network.
4. No.

[Nile]

1. just bump up the block size to 2mb
2. transaction malleability, and size by removing the signature out of the trx
3. Lightning network, (apparently doing small tax off network?) could work better, I think, because it’s now a smaller file.
4. No. Adoption had been slow. Not sure where its at now.

[Nile]

2. Actually not size, but security with the transaction malleability fix.

[edstar]

What was a proposed alternative to Segwit?

Increase the Bitcoin block size from 1MB to 2MB.

What did Segwit solve more than just the scaling issue?

Mainly, it was implemented to fix a bug within the Bitcoin protocol called ID transaction malleability.

And at the same time, this fix (Segwit) also provided a second layer protocol for future developments on top of the Bitcoin core protocol to flourish such as smart contracts.

How is Segwit and the Lightning network connected?

The lighting network utilizes the Segwit protocol as Segwit was designed to provide a second layer protocol so future upgrades such as the Lighting Network could flourish.

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

Not at all as Segwit was a soft fork.