Segwit Reading Assignment

Blockchain and Bitcoin 101
#1146
  1. What was a proposed alternative to Segwit?

A proposed alternative to Segwit was to do a hard fork and rise the bitcoin block size limit to 2 mb.

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

The Segwit upgrade removes the witness information (signatures) from the transaction data itself, which enables many 2. layer solutions of the system to put more trust in the transaction ID (hash) before it becomes confirmed in a block.

  1. How is Segwit and the Lightning network connected?

The lightning network is a 2. layer solution to bitcoin, that uses the new features of transaction IDs, enabled by Segwit.

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

No. The Segwit upgrade was a soft fork, which means that transactions of the old type is still accepted as valid, by nodes already running the upgraded software.

1 Like
#1147
  • What was a proposed alternative to Segwit?
    Doubling the Block size was proposed however this only kicks the same problem down the line. It would also slow down the propagation of blocks as more data would need to be pushed out nodes in the network.
  • What did Segwit solve more than just the scaling issue?
    Segwit also solves transaction malleability a flaw allowing the transaction ID to to be modified. It also avoids the need for a hard fork
  • How is Segwit and the Lightning network connected?
    Segwit allows for a second layer to sit on the network which allows small transactions to happen off chain only being added when users are ready.
  • Are people, wallets and other services forced to use Segwit?
    No, currently there is just below 40% adoption on the network.
1 Like
#1148

  1. Block size increase

  2. transaction malleability

  3. it allowed the lightning network to work

  4. no

1 Like
#1149
  1. To increase block size. Bitcoin cash eventually became a fork of bitcoin with a block size of 8mb
  2. Transaction malleability. Where people could alter transactions.
  3. Segwit enables off chain developments such as the lightning network which does transactions with minimal delays that are written to the blockchain at a later time.
  4. No
1 Like
#1150

The proposed alternative was to make the block size larger. However, that would have caused a hard fork.

Segwit also solved malleability.

Segwit and lightning net work are connected because segwit made lightning network possible.

Wallets aren’t forced to use Segwit because it was a soft fork.

1 Like
#1151
  1. What was a proposed alternative to Segwit?
    A. increasing the block size
  2. What did Segwit solve more than just the scaling issue?
    A. Segwit also fixed a bug in the bitcoin code called transaction malleability.
  3. How is Segwit and the Lightning network connected?
    A. Fixing the transaction malleability issue allowed for second layer protocols like lightning network to be built on top of bitcoin.
  4. Are people, wallets and other services forced to use Segwit?
    A. No. There was a hard fork called Bitcoin cash which uses increased block size which does not use segwit
1 Like
#1152

  1. What was a proposed alternative to Segwit?
    Increased block size to between 2MB and 32MB

  2. What did Segwit solve more than just the scaling issue?
    Transaction Malleability is a bitcoin bug that is preventing bitcoin other uses cases such as as second-layer protocols and smart contracts.

  3. How is Segwit and the Lightning network connected?
    Segwit supports a second layer protocol which is what lightning network protocol is about

  4. Are people, wallets and other services forced to use Segwit?
    No, they were given time to adopt it as a usecase.

1 Like
#1153

The proposed alternative to SegWit was BitcoinCash. Or more so, a decision to increase the block size.

SegWit helped solve more than just the scaling issue. It also helped to solve Transaction Malleability through removing the signature from the hashed transaction ID.

Segwit and the Lightning network are connected as they allow a feature that relied on unconfirmed transactions to be less risky and easier to design. Thereby allowing 2nd layer protocols and off chain transactions.

Network participants are not forced to use SegWit as it is a soft fork.

1 Like
#1154

1 increasing the blocksize
2 also malleability. Someone could change the signature of the transaction and therefor ask for an other transaction. Thus getting double.
3 Segwit made second layer solutions on the blockchain possible.
4 No they are not. Everybody can still use the old protocol. Soft fork

1 Like
#1155

1- block size increase
2- malleability issues
3- by not including the signature in the block, that makes unconfirmed txs safer
4- no, its an user activation soft fork

1 Like
#1156

Non segwit transactions are also still possible on Bitcoin as well :slight_smile:

3 Likes
#1157
  1. An alternative to segwit was a block size increase, that was rejected because of the extended time for confirmation of transactions, increased computational power etc.
  2. Segwit also took care of the malleability problem, by extracting the signature from the transaction, the possibility of manipulating signatures diminished.
  3. The Lightning network is a second layer of bitcoin, and the flaws in the bitcoin transactions was a security issue for any second layer application.
  4. No, but not upgrading will make it more time consuming to verify transactions.
1 Like
#1158
  1. What was a proposed alternative to Segwit?

A proposed alternative to Segwit was to raise the block limit size.

  1. What did Segwit solve more than just the scaling issue?
  • Segwit allows 4MB’s worth of data to be included in the block
  • Segwit inadvertently solved a security issue which allows for layer two protocols which weren’t possible before Segwit.
  1. How is Segwit and the Lightning network connected?

Lightinging is a layer two protocol made possible by the Segwit protocol because it reduces risk and the need for trust in complex applications.

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

No, but not using Segwit makes it more difficult for the rest of the network.

1 Like
#1159
  1. block size increase, meaning a hard fork in the blockchain
  2. solved transaction malleability, getting rid of a coding bug that made it possible to manipulate signatures before
  3. segwit made second layer protocols possible, allowing protocols such as lightning network to be built
  4. one can choose to use or not use segwit as it is a soft fork in the bitcoin blockchain
1 Like
#1160

It would take the same time. Doing legacy transactions would mean that you need to pay higher fees, and that you are open to a transaction malleability attack.

2 Likes
#1161

  • What was a proposed alternative to Segwit?
    Increasing the block size.

  • What did Segwit solve more than just the scaling issue?
    The Transaction Malleability problem. Removing the signatures from the block prevented people from making small changes to them that changed the hash.

  • How is Segwit and the Lightning network connected?
    It made features that rely upon unconfirmed transactions less risky and more feasible.

  • Are people, wallets and other services forced to use Segwit?
    No, it is being integrated into the existing architecture over time.

2 Likes
#1162

:thinking:

Did I misunderstand? If a node does not update and if it does not hold the database of trusted witness, it must query the signature, this making it more tome consuming?

1 Like
#1163

Ahoy Filip.

  • It is to increase the block size up to 2MB.
  • Segwit solved the malleability of Bitcoin transactions.
  • Lightning is a second layer protocol over a bitcoin, which is possible due to Segwit incorporation.
  • Not at all, some of them refused to use it, and created a Bitcoin Cash.
    Aloha.
1 Like
#1164

  1. Its main alternative was to increase block size.

  2. It solved the transaction malleability.

  3. They’re connected with the support of second layer protocols, such as the lightning network.

  4. Since Segwit is a soft fork, which everyone are connected to, not really.

1 Like
#1165
  1. Increase the block size
  2. Fixed the transaction malleability bug
  3. Segwit open the doors to second layer solutions
  4. No, been a soft fork. Segwit adoption has increased over time
1 Like