Segwit Reading Assignment

Blockchain and Bitcoin 101
#1106

  1. An increase of the 1mb block size limit was an alternative proposal to segwit.

  2. Segwit not only made transactions smaller by removing signature data, but also solved the problem of transaction malleability. When signature data is included in the transaction not only is the transaction larger but the transaction hash could also be changed by altering the signature. Without the signature data in the transaction the transaction hash cannot be changed without altering the transaction data.

  3. The lightning network became possible because of the implementation of segwit. Second layer developments like the lightning network rely on non-malleable transactions to function properly. Segwit solved this problem by removing the signature data from the transactions.

  4. Segwit adoption is not forced because it is a soft fork. Those who choose to implement segwit can do so, but those who don’t are still complying to the rules of the bitcoin code.

1 Like
#1107
  1. Bitcoin Cash with larger block size
  2. Also solves tx malleability issue by removing signature from tx. It removed the vulnerability of a malicious party changing the signature while keeping the underlying tx so that the ID would change making the sender think the tx didn’t go through and therefore send another tx.
  3. Segwit allows second layer apps to build on bitcoin since it reduces some of the risk by solving the tx mall. issue
  4. Nobody is forced as it is not a hardfork. It was slowly adopted at first as there was/is still the option of not using Segwit.
1 Like
#1108

Segwit

  1. What was the proposed alternative to Segwit?
    Segwit was one idea to solve the two issues of large block sizes and transaction malleability. Another alternative that was proposed to Segwit, was increasing the block size from 1 MB up to 4 MB. Not all of the community supported the increase in block size, which caused a hardfork to occur, creating Bitcoin Cash.

  2. What did Segwit solve more than just the scaling issue?
    Segwit created different possibilities within the Bitcoin blockchain. Besides the scaling issues of block sizes, segwit also helped with transaction malleability. In one way, this is considered a scaling fix and in another way it is considered a security solution. Removing the signatures from the hashed block in segwit, enables no hash ID to be modified, resulting in funds being secured. Segwit also enables the ability to have layer 2 solutions, which are protocols running with segwit. The lightning network is one example.

  3. How is Segwit and the Lightning network connected?
    Segwit and the Lightning network are connected to each other through layer 2 solutions.

  4. Are people, wallets and other services forced to use Segwit?
    Segwit is a softfork in the Bitcoin protocol. No one is forced to use the feature. This feature is a bonus to use, considering that segwit can reduce transaction fees by pulling out the signatures from the block inputs. If anyone adopts segwit, sending transactions will cost less for them. Some wallets also have Segwit and Legacy (normal Bitcoin addresses available to use. Adding support for segwit from a platform’s view, can incentivize users to use the platform, where if the user wants to send a transaction, their transaction fee can be less.

1 Like
#1109

  1. What was a proposed alternative to Segwit?

    • Increasing the block size to above 1mb.

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

    • He fixed a security vulnerability in the blockchain where you could alter the transaction ID and the subsequent hash to send money to the wrong address.

  3. How is Segwit and the Lightning network connected?

    • Both these things increase the transaction capacity.

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

    • No, you can choose which wallets and services you use.
1 Like
#1110
  1. Increase the block size
  2. Transaction Malleability
  3. Solving malleablity issue allows for layer 2 solutions
  4. No as its a soft fork
1 Like
#1111

  1. A proposed alternative was to increase the block size limit up from 1 MB.

  2. SegWit also solve the issue of transaction malleability by removing signature data from transaction
    .

  3. SegWit fixes the transaction malleability issue which created problems with implementing layer 2 solutions such as lightning network.

  4. People are not forced to used SegWit. In fact, part of the community who refused to use SegWit segregated via hard fork to create Bitcoin cash.

1 Like
#1112

1.) Increased blocksize.

2.) Tx Mallebility issues by removing the signature from the txid thus increasing the number of tx that cen be send due to removal of the txid.

3.) Segwit enabled second layer solutions.

4.) No, soft fork.

1 Like
#1113

  1. What was a proposed alternative to Segwit?
    Increase the size of the block from 1 mg to 2 mg

  2. What did Segwit solve more than just the scaling issue?
    The malleability issue. With Segwit, the signatures are not included in the formation of the hash number of the block so if the signatures were to be modified, it wouldn’t change the hash number.

  3. How is Segwit and the Lightning network connected?
    Segwit supports devlpt of 2nd layer protocol like the Lightning network.

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

1 Like
#1114

What was a proposed alternative to Segwit?
A: Simply increasing the maximum block size
What did Segwit solve more than just the scaling issue?
A: It solved the problem of transaction malleability by removing the witness information outside of the block so that changes to the script and signature will not change the transaction id.
How is Segwit and the Lightning network connected?
A:Since Segwit removes the signature from the block it reduces the inherent risks of sending unconfirmed txo’s, such as over the lightning network.
Are people, wallets and other services forced to use Segwit?
A: No. However, it makes sense to adopt Segwit, as with faster confirmations and lower txo fees, it will likely attract more users to use Bitcoin and increase it’s use case as a viable currency.

1 Like
#1115

  1. The proposed alternative to Segwit was to increase the block size limit.

  2. Segwit was originally devised to fix the issue of transaction malleability.

  3. The conceptualization of Segwit made Lightning network possible, signature data as well as frequent and small transactions can be stored off the main blockchain.

  4. No. However, more people, wallets and other services are discovering the merits and potential of its use.

1 Like
#1116

  1. What was a proposed alternative to Segwit?
    Increasing block size that would have lead to a Hard Fork.

  2. What did Segwit solve more than just the scaling issue?
    TX Malleability issue, where someone could alter senders TX ID that would then result in another TX Hash. Witness data (signature) was separated from the rest of the TX.

  3. How is Segwit and the Lightning network connected?
    SegWit is the foundation for the Lightning Network that will eventually allow the Bitcoin to process millions of TX per second.

  4. Are people, wallets and other services forced to use Segwit?
    No, because it’s a Soft Fork.

1 Like
#1117
  1. What was a proposed alternative to Segwit?
    -some like BCash proponents wanted larger block sise
  2. What did Segwit solve more than just the scaling issue?
    -the main issue it solved was the maleability bug
  3. How is Segwit and the Lightning network connected?
    -the maleability bug would have been a risk for lightning network, but with it solved the implementatiin will be less risky
  4. Are people, wallets and other services forced to use Segwit?
    -no, since this is a soft fork, it is backwards compatible, and implementatiin in wallets started slow, but is catching on.
1 Like
#1118

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

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

  3. How is Segwit and the Lightning network connected?
    Adopting Segwit made possible the development of other second layer solutions such as the Lightning Network.

  4. Are people, wallets and other services forced to use Segwit?
    No, but many have chosen to use it.

1 Like
#1119

  1. What was a proposed alternative to Segwit?
    A Hard fork, increasing the block size, which would lead to longer processing time and inscreasing fees, not feasable for a successful development of the network.

  2. What did Segwit solve more than just the scaling issue? it fixed the so called transaction malleability issue.

  3. How is Segwit and the Lightning network connected?
    The Segwit implementation allows to additional layers to be built on top of the network such as the lighning network. By reducing the risks connected to unconfirmed UTXO and letting some smaller transaction off chains, it would increase the speed of the transactions’ capability.

  4. Are people, wallets and other services forced to use Segwit?
    No but many services started the adoption and it has somehow become standard over time. Those who opposed to the softfork decided to hard fork into Bitcoin Cash.

1 Like
#1120

  1. Proposed alternative was to double the block size to 2MB which was taken onboard by the Bitcoin Cash fork

  2. Segwit had also solved the issue with Transaction ID malleability by removing the signature part from the transaction so in turn you are not able to alter the transaction ID.

  3. This gave birth to solutions such as the lightening network as it allowed unconfirmed data to be less of a risk and usable as they rely on the transaction ID

  4. As this was a soft fork solution, people had not been forced to implement Segwit, but as time has gone by, more and more wallets are moving towards Segwit. Legacy is still available and segwit is compatible with the old protocol

1 Like
#1121
  1. increase in block size, which Bitcoin cash did
  2. the tx maleability issue
  3. segwit made second layer solutions possible
  4. no since it was a soft fork
1 Like
#1122

  1. Increase the size of a block to 2mB.

  2. Transaction malleability

  3. Segwit enabled second layer solutions.

  4. No, you can still use old protocol.

1 Like
#1123

  1. Block size increase.

  2. Transaction malleability issue.

  3. Segwit made it possible for the lightning network to be built on top.

  4. No. It was a softfork.

1 Like
#1124
  1. What was a proposed alternative to Segwit?

Increaseing the block size from 1 mb to 2mb

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

Transaction malleability

  1. How is Segwit and the Lightning network connected?

segwit supported the development of the second layer of protocols , which i s the lightning network

  1. Are people, wallets and other services forced to use Segwit?
    no because the majority of the nodes have adapted it.
1 Like
#1125
  1. Doubling the block size from 1mB to 2mB was a proposed alternative to Segwit.
  2. In addition to the scaling issue, segwit also gave a solution to the issue of transaction malleability.
  3. Segwit supports the lightning network to be developed as a second layer protocol.
  4. People, wallets, and services are not forced to use Segwit. But so far there has been gradual, steady use by many of the main ones.
1 Like