Segwit Reading Assignment

Blockchain and Bitcoin 101
#903

increasing the block size.
solved the malleability issue with changing txd id.
segwit made 2nd layer protocolslike lighting possible
Segwit is still optional and cheaper.

#904

  1. to increase the block size

  2. Security by removing witness information outside the base TX block - so no affection on TXID by alter script sig

  3. Segwit supports the development of this sort of second layer protocols. The malleability fix made any feature that relied on unconfirmed transactions less risky and easier to design

  4. I know the right answer seems to be soft fork, but I thought that only on hard forks everyone can decide, if he wats to go with the new update or not. In a soft fork where valid blocks become invalid you have to implement the update.

I`m wrong I know but I don’t know why? Could someone help please? :smiley:

#905

Segwit Reading Assignment

  1. A proposed alternative to Segwit was to increase block size, but this was seen as the same problem having to solve at a future date.
    2.Segwit also stopped transaction malleability by removing th e hash from the transaction data. That which is melleable, the signature, is outside the transaction data structure.
  2. Segwit and the Lightning network are connected because Segwit supports the development of second layer protocols, such as the Lightning network. Any feature that relies on unconfirmed transactions now becomes less risky.
  3. People, wallets and other services are not required to use Segwit for now, but more and more wallets are adding Segwit.
#906
  1. To increase block size.
  2. It was used to fix transaction malleability.
  3. The development of the Lighting network is supported by Segwit.
  4. No, they may be starting to, but Segwit is not yet in full use.
#907

What was a proposed alternative to Segwit?
To increase allowed size of data field above 1mb. It was done in hard fork Bitcoin Cash.

What did Segwit solve more than just the scaling issue?
It solved the transaction malleabiity problem.

How is Segwit and the Lightning network connected?
Segwit made 2nd layer solutions possible.

Are people, wallets and other services forced to use Segwit?
No, as it is a soft fork old versions still function without segwit.

#908
  1. Increase in block size was proposed
  2. Segwit resolves a transaction malleability. This is where one is able to alter a transaction ID once it’s sent.
  3. Second layer protocol such as Lightening Network was made possible with the use of Segwit solution of malleability fix.
  4. This is a soft fork, you’re not forced to change however Segwit is being adopted by bitcoin wallets.
#909
    • What was a proposed alternative to Segwit?
      A: Increase the block size.
    • What did Segwit solve more than just the scaling issue?
      A. Transaction malleability and it also made 2nd layer solutions possible.
    • How is Segwit and the Lightning network connected?
      A. Segwit made unconfirmed transactions less risky and also made 2nd layer solutions possible. LN is a 2nd layer solution which would not have been possible without Segwit.
    • Are people, wallets and other services forced to use Segwit?
      No.
#910
  1. What was a proposed alternative to Segwit?

An increase in blocksize from 1Mb - 2Mb.

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

It has also solved the transaction malleability problem by removing signatures from transactions in the block.

  1. How is Segwit and the Lightning network connected?

By solving the malleability problem it has allowed second layer protocols to be built upon the bitcoin network, like the lightning network.

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

No because this was a soft fork meaning it wasn’t compulsory to upgrade.

#911

1 Proposal to change the block size from 1 mb to 2mb
2. Segwit also solved trx Malleability.
3. SegWit also supports the development of second layer protocols, such as the lightning network. The malleability fix made any feature that relied on unconfirmed transactions less risky and easier to design.
4. No. Resistance to SegWit was one of the factors behind the development of bitcoin cash, a fork of the bitcoin network which chose to implement a larger block size limit rather than rely on a new transaction structure.

#912

  1. A proposed alternative to SegWit was to increase the overall block size.

  2. In addition to Bitcoin’s scaling issue SegWit provided a solution to transaction malleability.

  3. SegWit and the Lightning Network are connected because the latter is built upon SegWit. The combination allows for reduced transaction time and consequently reduced fees.

  4. SegWit is not an enforced service. This update allows the validation of previous blocks into the network (allows the use of the old protocol) and therefor users are not required to adopt it.

#913
  1. Increase in block size from 1-2 MB.
  2. TX malleance, where a person could modify a transaction so it didn’t have the same hash no.
  3. With segwit, 2nd layer solutions were made possible and one of those was lightning network
  4. No. Soft fork.
#914
  1. What was a proposed alternative to Segwit?
    increase the size of the blocksize up from the 1mb size
  2. What did Segwit solve more than just the scaling issue?
    the malleability so now the possibility of faster throughput of Tx
  3. How is Segwit and the Lightning network connected?
    Lightning network is a second layer protocol ontop of BTC, where the Tx are processed faster, it is a side chain for small Tx which are settled later so as not to clog up the processing speed.
  4. Are people, wallets and other services forced to use Segwit? No, but eventually they will , since they will realize the need to keep up with the lightning network speed and not sure but the fees they could earn.
#915

What was a proposed alternative to Segwit?

  • implement a larger block size limit rather than rely on a new transaction structure.
  • This became Bitcoin cash

What did Segwit solve more than just the scaling issue?

  • It also solved the transaction mallability problem ( manual changing the TX_ID )

How is Segwit and the Lightning network connected?

  • both supports now the development of second layer protocols which would not be possible.

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

  • SegWit upgrade is compatible with the previous protocol so not forced to use segwit (segwit is softfork)
#916

  1. A proposed alternative to Segwit was to increase the block size

  2. Segwit also solved the transaction malleability problem

  3. Lightning network is a “layer 2” protocol built on top of the blockchain, it requires the fix for transaction malleability such as found in Segwit

  4. Segwit is a soft fork, hence people, wallets and other services are not forced to use it

#917

It also made the fees less, and allowed us to have second layer solution called lightning network. :smiley:

#918
  1. It was proposed to increase the block size, it lead to a hard fork, bitcash.
  2. It solve the malleability issue,
  3. Segwit allows the Lightning network by reducing the size of the blocks, no need to store the signatures.
  4. No, some wallets can read Segwit other exchanges like coinbase are adapting. Not force to use it.
#919

For the lightning network to function it required the transaction malleability fix, which segwit resolved. Without segwit, lightning network is not possible. :slight_smile:

#920

We are up to 66% of segwit adoption! :muscle: :muscle:

#921

Yes, segwit made the second layer solution possible. The lightning network. :smiley:

#922

Its a soft fork. And soft forks are not forced upgrades. You can accept them or decline them. :smiley: