Segwit Reading Assignment

[Fabrice]

@Tompos

1. What was a proposed alternative to Segwit?

Lightning network

The alternative was to increase the blocksize wich requires a hard Fork.

Because segwit Fixxed the transaction malleability issue (by moving the signatures to a different datastructure)
It became safe to use the lightning network on Bitcoin.
Because before segwit, you could manipulate tx ID’s of unconfirmed transactions. The lightning network needs transaction ID’s tobe reliable

[Fabrice]

@sajede.k

The lightning network will further boost bitcoin’s transaction capacity by taking frequent, small transactions off-chain, only settling on the bitcoin blockchain when the users are ready.’
i cant get the point of this paragraph from reading assignment.

So in lightning you can open a channel with someone. To fund this channel, you need to make a special transaction that locks some of your onchain bitcoin into lightning (using 2 of 2 multisig) Then you can transact really fast with others in a trustless way instant settlement (without using the blockchain) then you don’t need to pay fee’s for miners. If you have bitcoin in lightning. You can always settle it back on the bitcoin blockchain anytime you want.

PS. We have a course about how the lightning network works.

Bitcoin's Lightning Network, Simply Explained!

[NLUGNER]

Q). What was a proposed alternative to Segwit?

A).INCREASE BLOCKSIZE,/BLOCK WEIGHT) (Not Ideal)
Q). What did Segwit solve more than just the scaling issue?

A).possible by SegWit is that it 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.

Q). How is Segwit and the Lightning network connected?

A).SegWit solves Transaction Malleability, thereby enabling the Lightning Network, an overlay network of micropayment channels, hypothetically resolving the scaling problem by enabling virtually unlimited numbers of instant, low-fee transactions to occur “off chain”.

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

A). no, is the short answer due to the fact that all old wallets are still being used but it will be the future since the big boys are adapting Segwit technology in their wallets. In my humble opinion It will become the future standard. (Which can only be a good thing).

[Wei]

1. An alternative proposal was to increase the protocols 1MB limit.

2. Segwit also fixed the transaction malleability issue by removing the ability to change the transaction lists hash ID.

3. Segwit connects to the lightning network as a second layer protocol taking small, frequent transactions offchain to increase performance.

4. People and wallets are not forced to use segwit, it is backward compatible, but may choose to do so to take advantage of the problems it solves.

[AndreaH]

1. A proposed alternative to Segwit was an increase to block size, ie. a hard fork to create Bitcoin Cash

2. Segwit also solved the problem of transaction malleability which increased the security of the network.

3. The Lightning network is built on Segwit. This increases the rate of transactions to millions per second as opposed to 7-10 per second.

4. People, wallets and other services are not forced to use Segwit. The old protocol is still compatible as a soft fork.

[sajede.k]

thank you very much.
it’s interesting.

[Thijs.Smit]

1. What was a proposed alternative to Segwit?
   Segwit2x
   Schnorr signatures

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

3. How is Segwit and the Lightning network connected?
   It uses a feature of unconfirmed Tx’s that is now less risky

4. Are people, wallets and other services forced to use Segwit?
   No, but because it reduces fees. It may be supported soon by more wallets

[Alko89]

@Thijs.Smit

Segwit2x

Segwit2x was a thing when Segwit was already enabled on Bitcoin, tbh I forgot what was it about. But the alternative to segwit was to increase the block size.

[Ian_Croasdell]

What was a proposed alternative to Segwit?
To increase the block size from 1MB
What did Segwit solve more than just the scaling issue?
The malleability of the blocks as the malleable part the signature is now outside of the block.
How are Segwit and the Lightning network connected?
The segwit fork helped to make the lighting network possible.
Are people, wallets and other services forced to use Segwit?
No one is forced to use it, as its a soft fork and running old nodes is still possible this gives total security. It also keeps the bitcoin community together and promotes adoption so a win-win all round.

[Ling]

1. What was a proposed alternative to Segwit?
   To increase blockchain size.

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

To fix a bug in the bitcoin code called transaction malleability.

3. How is Segwit and the Lightning network connected?

SegWit supports the development of second layer protocols, such as the lightning network.

4. Are people, wallets and other services forced to use Segwit?
   No, The update is a slow rollout.

[Louiseee618]

1. What was a proposed alternative to Segwit?
   Block size increase which lead to a hard fork update called Bitcoin Cash.

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

3. How is Segwit and the Lightning network connected?
   SegWit supports second-layer protocols such as lightning network.

4. Are people, wallets and other services forced to use Segwit?
   No, since it is a soft fork update, old and new locking script can be used.

[jamesucf]

1. Another alternative was increasing the block size above the current 1MB. This was done and caused a hard fork that created Bitcoin Cash.
2. Transaction malleability where small changes could be made to transactions that modified the transaction id but not the content. This prevented the development of complex features such as second-layer protocols and smart contracts.
3. Segwit supports the development of second layer protocols for which the lightning network is one. The malleability fix of Segwit also made features that rely on unconfirmed transactions less risky and easier to design. The ligtning network takes frequent small transactions off chain (unconfirmed) and settles on the blockchain later.
4. People, wallets and other services are not forced to use Segwit as the adoption process is gradual. They will however, not be able to use the Segwit features until they do so.

[CryptoQuandary]

What was a proposed alternative to Segwit?
A hardfork to increase the block size.

• What did Segwit solve more than just the scaling issue?
  TX mallability which allows the signature and scripts to be changed without affecting the TXID.
  It solved the problem of transactions being changed.

• How is Segwit and the Lightning network connected?
  Segwit allows the lightning network to be built as a second layer protocol. Any feature that relies on unconfirmed TXs is less risky and easier to design because of the mallability fix.

• Are people, wallets and other services forced to use Segwit?
  No it is not mandatory but it is an option.

[TravisB]

@filip

• What was a proposed alternative to Segwit?
• What did Segwit solve more than just the scaling issue?
• How is Segwit and the Lightning network connected?
• Are people, wallets and other services forced to use Segwit?

1. Increasing block size
2. Transaction Malleability
   3.By allowing faster TX times and 2nd layer protocols
   4.Not at this time

[Daniel_L]

1. What was a proposed alternative to Segwit?
   Increase of the blocksize to fit more transactions with the at that point of time given data structure in it and also a hard fork due to expansion of the rule set

2. What did Segwit solve more than just the scaling issue?
   Transaction malleability -> unwanted changing of transaction signature

3. How is Segwit and the Lightning network connected?

• Segwit supports 2nd layer protocol (lightning network is one)
• Mallebility fix of Segwit made features les risky
• lightning network takes freuent small transaction off chain to relieve

4. Are people, wallets and other services forced to use Segwit?
   It’s a soft fork update so new and old script can be used but it reduces fees so there is an incentive to use it

[BostjanZ]

1. A proposed alternative to SegWit was increasing the block size.

2. SegWit solved transaction malleability.

3. SegWit supports the development of layer 2 protocols, such as Lightning network. The malleability fix made any feature that relied on unconfirmed transactions less risky and easier to design.

4. No (it is a soft fork update)

[Nicksta]

1. To increase the blocksize
2. Fix the bug of altering the signature attached to transactions after a transaction occurred - malleability fix
3. Segwit update enable a second layer of protocol to be connected to the BTC protocol. The lightning network will further boost bitcoin’s transaction capacity by taking frequent, small transactions off-chain, only settling on the bitcoin blockchain when the users are ready.
4. No

[jaycho03]

1. The development of Bitcoin Cash which increased the block size
2. It solved tx mall. because it now stored the signatures for each transaction separate meaning he tx ID could not be affected when someone modified the signature of the transaction
3. Segwit made unconfirmed TX’s less risky which allowed the lightning system to work. The lightning system is a second layer network that allows people to make as many minor transactions as they want and release it to the blockchain when they are ready.
4. No it isn’t a hard fork. Some groups refused to switch like Bitcoin cash.

[Alko89]

@jaycho03

Some groups refused to switch like Bitcoin cash.

You can also still use old style transactions on Bitcoin

[jaycho03]

So Bicoin cash isn’t a different currency?