Segwit Reading Assignment

Blockchain and Bitcoin 101
#1186
  1. What was a proposed alternative to Segwit?

Increase the block size.

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

It also solved transaction malleability.

  1. How is Segwit and the Lightning network connected?

It allows processing intermediate transactions off-chain which is needed by second layer protocols like the Lightning network.

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

No, it is a soft fork which is based on voluntary adoption.

1 Like
#1187
  1. not “kicking the can down the road”, they allege, by increasing block size (hard fork), e.g. btc cash.
  2. it supported development of second layer protocols like the lightning network, and other core improving features such as MAST, Shnorr, and TumbleBit.
  3. Segwit paved the way for lightning network. made second layer solutions, in general, possible. Bc Segwit solved malleability concern, LN was able to operate securely and off chain, which off loads block weight to LN with less risk.
  4. no, soft fork (network contraction). however, this is the way of the future. but does this mean there are numerous chains operating simultaneous? can a segwit block be linked to a non-segwit block? @filip
1 Like
#1188
  1. What was a proposed alternative to Segwit?

The most obvious alternative proposal to Segwit was to increase the block size i.e. 1 MB to 2MB although this was considered by some as ´kicking the can down the road´. It also would be resulted in a hardfork.

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

The scaling issue has resulted in increased TX speeds and lower fees. However, Segwit has also resolved a serious TXs malleability bug and made possible the development of a second layer of protocols such as the lightning network

How is Segwit and the Lightning network connected? Network which will

See 2. Segwit allows for the development of the lightning network which will considerably increase transactions speed.

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

Wallets and smaller nodes are not required to use Segwit as it was a softfork and therefore compatible with the older protocol. However, newer wallets and larger nodes have / are implementing the change.

1 Like
#1189
  1. What was a proposed alternative to Segwit?
    • Blocksizes bigger, from 1mb to 2mb
  2. What did Segwit solve more than just the scaling issue?
    • Fixed the transaction malleability issue by removing the signature from the transactions hash, and allowed for more development for new ideas.
  3. How is Segwit and the Lightning network connected?
    • By removing the signature from the transaction data, it allowed for the Lightning network to be developed, it is a second layer protocol that allows for much faster transactions.
  4. Are people, wallets and other services forced to use Segwit?
    • No
1 Like
#1190

  1. What was a proposed alternative to Segwit?
    increasing the size of the block which will lead to a hard fork

  2. What did Segwit solve more than just the scaling issue?
    it solves a bug in bitcoin code, tx malleability

  3. How is Segwit and the Lightning network connected?
    SegWit is the foundation for the Lightning Network by making it possible to be the second layer network

  4. Are people, wallets and other services forced to use Segwit?
    no it’s soft fork so the old TXs still valid and adoption of segwit is increasing since August 2017

1 Like
#1191

  1. What was a proposed alternative to Segwit?
    The alternative for Segwit was to have a larger block size limit

  2. What did Segwit solve more than just the scaling issue?
    Other than the scaling issue, by removing the signature from the block it freed up a lot of space for more transactions to be stored on the block, which means that bitcoin can process a greater throughput without changing the block size.

  3. How is Segwit and the Lightning network connected?
    Lightning network is a second layer protocol that takes small transactions off-chain, only settling on the bitcoin blockchain when the users are ready.

  4. Are people, wallets and other services forced to use Segwit?
    The adoption is voluntary, only who wishes to use Segwit adhered to it.

1 Like
#1192

I’m not sure what you mean by that? There is only one chain on Bitcoin. Both normal and segwit transactions can go into the same block. :slight_smile:

1 Like
#1193
  1. Increasing the block size was a suggested alternative to segwit.
  2. Segwit solved the issue of transaction malleability.
  3. Segwit supports the development of second layer protocols such as the Lightning Network.
  4. No, segwit was a soft fork therefore it was still in line with the old protocol
1 Like
#1194

Alternative to segwit was increasing the block size.

Transaction malleability was also fixed by removing the Transaction ID out of the block.

Fixing transaction malleability made possible the creation of the lighting network.

Short answer no, that is because segwit is not a hard fork requiring 100% network adoption.

1 Like
#1195

1 the propose alternative to segwit was increasing the size fo the block grader than 1MB
2.also solve the transaction malleability and lower fees
3.Segwit support the lighting network which is the second layer of the solution
4.NO because is a soft fork but wallet and are implemented segwit support

1 Like
#1196

  1. The alternative to SegWit was the increase of the block size. That approach was taken by Bitcoin Cash for example. W.nk…s!

  2. Segwit solves not only the scaling issue, but also prevent transaction malleability.

  3. By fixing the transaction malleability, SegWit made the network and the unconfirmed transaction, in particular, less risky which allowed the development of second-layer solutions such as Lightning Network.

  4. No one is forced to use SegWit as it is a Soft Fork, however, is recommended so all can contribute to the improvement of the network.

1 Like
#1197

The alternative proposed was a larger block size, which created a fork with Bitcoin Cash
It also solved malleability, also made possible to do second layer on top of the network
Lightning network uses segwit taking smaller transactions off chain and getting them back on chain when needed
No, they are not forced to use segwit

1 Like
#1198
  1. A proposed alternative to Segwit was an increase in block size.
  2. aside from the scaling issue, segwit also addressed transaction malleability which allowed someone to change the transaction id.
  3. Segwit allowed for the development of second layer protocols such as lighting network, which further boosted bitcoin’s transaction capacity by taking small transactions off-chain.
  4. No, segwit is a soft fork so people, wallets, and other devices are not forced to use the segwit protocol however more and more wallets are adding support for its clear advantages and is currently at 66% adoption as of Jan 2020.
1 Like
#1199

My Answers:

  1. An increase in Block size 4MB
  2. Fixed the Malleability issue
  3. They are connected with the 2-layer solution
  4. No. It’s also compatible with the old Protocol
1 Like
#1200

As Bitcoin grew in popularity, transactions increasingly reached the 1MB block limit leading to higher fees and longer confirmation times. The first proposal was to simply increase the block limit, but critics felt that such an increase was the equivalent of ‘kicking the can down the road’ rather than actually fixing the problem. Thus, SegWit (or Segregated Witness) was proposed.

SegWit solved two problems: the block limit and transaction malleability. However, SegWit led the way for second-layer protocols like the Lightning network, MAST, TumbleBit, and Schorr signatures.

SegWit and the Lightning network are connected in that they have the same objective: faster transactions. However, SegWit and Lightning achieve this in different ways. SegWit reduces the excess “weight” of transactions by removing their signatures. On the other hand, Lightning takes small transactions–known as micropayments–off the blockchain entirely.

No, no one is obligated to use SegWit. SegWit was a soft fork, thus backward compatible. The updated protocol abbreviated the locking script to distinguish SegWit from non-SegWit transactions.

1 Like
#1201

  1. The alternative to SegWit that was proposed was to increase the size of the block. This resulted in the hard fork that created Bitcoin Cash.

  2. Segwit solved the malleability issue where a person receiving bitcoin could change the signature and claim to have not received it.

  3. Segwit will open up the possibility of second layer protocols such as the lightning network running on top of Bitcoin.

  4. No many wallets are yet to add SegWit support.

1 Like
#1202

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

  2. What did Segwit solve more than just the scaling issue?
    It also fixed transaction malleability

  3. How is Segwit and the Lightning network connected?
    Segwit made second layer protocol possible, i.e. lightening network

  4. Are people, wallets and other services forced to use Segwit?
    No, as it is a softfork

2 Likes
#1203

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

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

3. How is Segwit and the Lightning network connected?
The lightning network makes unconfirmed transactions possible with segwit. All the small transactions are not on the chain but will be there when the transactions are confirmed. This will make transactions faster

4. Are people, wallets and other services forced to use Segwit?
No, they can continue on a different chain. Without the use of the update

#1204

Both of these are true in fact, but Lightning network wouldn’t be possible without segwit(or at least more risky to implement) since it relies on unconfirmed transactions and these are dangerous because of the malleability problem that allows a malicious party to change the txid :slight_smile:

3 Likes
#1205

They can also continue to use the Bitcoin blockchain since old transactions are still valid :slight_smile:

1 Like