Segwit Reading Assignment

Blockchain and Bitcoin 101
#1386

  1. What was a proposed alternative to Segwit?
    Make the blocks size bigger to let the block be filled with more transactions

  2. What did Segwit solve more than just the scaling issue?
    The transacction malleability for most and set the layer like lightning.

  3. How is Segwit and the Lightning network connected?
    Segwit makes second layer possible

  4. Are people, wallets and other services forced to use Segwit?
    No. Old transactions can be used as well.

1 Like
#1387

Assignment on Segwit

  1. What was a proposed alternative to Segwit?
    A hardfork of increasing block size to 2mb, which Bitcoin Cash adopts.
  2. What did Segwit solve more than just the scaling issue?
    Segwit also fixed transaction malleability, which allows develop to update on signature and script. It also enables MAST, Schnorr signatures, and TumbleBit possible to be develop on bitcoin mainnet
  3. How is Segwit and the Lightning network connected?
    Segwit makes second layer possible. So sidechain like lightning network and liquid network can be made in Bitcoin
  4. Are people, wallets and other services forced to use Segwit?
    Not forced, it is a softfork so old addresses and transactions can be used normally.
1 Like
#1388 
**What was a proposed alternative to Segwit?**

increasing the actual size of the blocks.

What did Segwit solve more than just the scaling issue?
TX malleability and the ability of someone to alter a sig.

**How is Segwit and the Lightning network connected?**

Lightening network takes frequent, small transactions off-chain, w/ this second layer protocol

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

No not forced. In fact btc cash created a hard fork because of the resistance to move to a change in the structure.

1 Like
#1389

You can also still use old style transactions on Bitcoin :slight_smile:

2 Likes
#1390

1. What was a proposed alternative to Segwit?

  1. Increase the block size. The solution of increasing the block size led to the BTC cash hard fork.
    2. What did Segwit solve more than just the scaling issue?
  2. Segwit actually borned as a solution for TX malleability, the solution it fit as well the block size issue.
    3. How is Segwit and the Lightning network connected?
    3.Segwit allow the second layer solution making lightning network possible.
    4. Are people, wallets and other services forced to use Segwit?
  3. No they are not force to, at the time of the assignment even big platform such Coinbase weren’t prepared. By now I don’t really know if anyone is still storing is ID into the transaction.
1 Like
#1391
  1. an increase to block size 1mB -> 2mB
  2. security issue called TX malleability
  3. The implementation of the Lightning network was possible because of the Segwit update.
  4. No, everyone can update when they wish.
1 Like
#1392

Those who opposed Segwit and had proposed alternate which was to increase the BTC block size.

By removing Signature from the transaction ID from block itself, it creating more secure 2nd layer capability.

Adoption of Segwit upgrade has secured BTC protocol malleability problem to the point that Lighting network has a potential of building on top of BTC network.

Since Segwit is part of upgrade all wallets and other such services must upgrade aswell or users will be forced to use other service to use new features and pay less in fees.

1 Like
#1393
  1. SegWit2x
  2. Transaction malleablity: the possibility of altering the transaction ID before the original transaction was confirmed
  3. SegWit makes the development of 2nd layer solutions like Lighting Network possible. Preventing transaction malleability is necessary to maintain authenticity of lighting network transactions.
  4. No one is forced to use SegWit, but, just like any network effect, the more that use it, the more will adopt it.
1 Like
#1394

Segwit is not forced. You can still create old style transactions on Bitcoin and get away with it :wink: You will pay more for the fees since Segwit transactions take up less space in a block :slight_smile:

1 Like
#1395

Segwit2x was a different thing and it happened later after Segwit was already activated. I forgot exactly what was it about.
The other alternative was to just increase the block size :slight_smile:

1 Like
#1396
  1. The alternative was to increase the block size (bitcoin Cash)
  2. Beyond the scaling problem, SegWit resolved the transaction malleability issue by removing the signature from the transaction hash.
  3. SegWit allows for more functionality, including second layer (layer 2) solutions such as lightning network which is a side change that settles transaction on the block chain once the transactions/users are ready.
  4. It is not mandatory to use SegWit and adoption has clearly taken time, but it is backwards compatible therefore all transaction are fine (Segwit and non-SegWit transactions)
1 Like
#1397

  1. What was a proposed alternative to Segwit?
    -block size increase like a hard fork update (eg:bitcoin cash)

  2. What did Segwit solve more than just the scaling issue?
    -transaction malleability via deployment of lightning network and decrease in transaction fees

  3. How is Segwit and the Lightning network connected?
    -help to avoid transaction malleability via segregation of digital signatures and 2nd layer protocol with lightning network

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

  • they are not forced but like soft update ,giving immense opportunity to try or prefer the pros of incorporating segwit support since original transaction ID is kept unique and not altered.
1 Like
#1398

  1. A larger block size was a proposed alternative to segwit.

  2. Segwit additionally solves the transaction malleability issue.

  3. Segwit allows for second layer protocols like the Lightning network, which boosts bitcoin’s transaction capacity by taking frequent, small transactions off-chain.

  4. No, it is a soft fork.

1 Like
#1399

  1. The proposed alternative to Segwit was to simply hard fork and increase the block size limit. Bitcoin Cash wanted to increase it to 4 MB

  2. More than just the scaling issue, Segwit solved the security issue of Transaction Malleability.

  3. Segwit made second layer solutions like the Lightning Network possible.

  4. No one is forced to use Segwit, it was a soft fork.

1 Like
#1400
  1. What was a proposed alternative to Segwit?
    A. Increasing the block size from 1mb to 2mb which would lead to a
    hard fork.
  2. What did Segwit solve more than just the scaling issue?
    A. It solved the transaction malleability issue by placing the signature
    outside of the transaction block.
  3. How is Segwit and the Lightning network connected?
    A. The proposed solution the BTC network came up with allowed for second
    layer protocols such as the Lightning network to be implemented that relied
    on unconfirmed transactions that were less risky and easier to design.
  4. Are people, wallets and other services forced to use Segwit?
    A. No, but the advantages to its adoption is beneficial to all users. With the
    conversion by basically all major players the use by most if not all is essentially
    inevitable.
1 Like
#1401

1 - Increase the size of block

2 - Fixed transaction maleability

3 -Segwit supports a second layer. Which enabled the lightning network

4 - No, because they are compatible with old protocol

1 Like
#1402
  1. What was a proposed alternative to Segwit?

Answer:
Increase block size from 1MB to 4MB.

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

Answer:
SegWit fixed the transaction malleability problem.

  1. How is Segwit and the Lightning network connected?

Answer:
Segwit supports the development of second layer protocols, such as the lightning network.

  1. Are people, wallets and other services forced to use Segwit?
    Answer:
    No, it is a soft fork
1 Like
#1403

  1. People proposed to simply increase the block size limit, instead of utilizing Segwit

  2. Segwit’s main purpose besides simply handling scaling, is to deal with the Transaction Malleability exploit.

  3. Segwit technology enables second layer transactions by lowering the risk involved with unconfirmed transactions. I also surmise that Segwit’s development created the technological concept that Lightning utilizes.

  4. Not all nodes are required to use Segwit, as it is a Soft Fork. I do not understand how this works outside of that fact, and could use further explanation.

1 Like
#1404

  1. Alternative would be increase in block size (ie: Bitcoin Cash) which uses 8MB blocks, but also a little less secure than BTC blockchain.

  2. It also solved transaction “Malleability” and enabled second layer protocols.

  3. They are connected because Segwit enables 2nd layer protocols to be used. In this case, the “Lightning Network.”

  4. They are not forced to use Segwit. It is a soft fork. However, if they do implement Segwit, their BTC transactions will process faster and with less transaction fees.

1 Like
#1405
  • bitcoin cash, which increased block size
  • transaction malleability
  • the lightning network is built on Segwit
  • No. Wallets slowly added Segwit
1 Like