- Bigger blocks
- Transaction Malleability
- By solving problem of transaction malleability, Segwit help to Lightning to be possible.
- Segwit was softfork so old transactions could be used.
1 Like
- Bitcoin Cash
- Transaction malleability
- Segwit made possible the development of second layer protocols (lightning network)
- No, but it is slowly being implemented.
1 Like
-
What was a proposed alternative to Segwit?
Increasing the block size was a proposed plan however this would result in a hard fork -
What did Segwit solve more than just the scaling issue?
It prevented malliabiliaty ie altering the blocks signature causing a change in transaction id -
How is Segwit and the Lightning network connected?
It added m second layer protocols, on which the lightening network was built. -
Are people, wallets and other services forced to use Segwit?
No there are still nodes running the older protocol
1 Like
Increasing the block size limit . ( Hard Fork )
- What did Segwit solve more than just the scaling issue?
It also solved Transaction Malleability.
- How is Segwit and the Lightning network connected?
The Lightening network is a second layer protocol that boosts bitcoins transaction capacity by taking frequent small tx’s off the chain & only settles them on the BTC blockchain once the users are ready.
- Are people, wallets and other services forced to use Segwit?
No the soft fork allows other to still use the original protocol.
1 Like
- rise the block size to 2mb.
- Segwit solved the transaction malleability problem.
- The malleability fix made any feature that relied on unconfirmed transactions less risky and easier to design.
- no, but in time I am guessing it would be wise to do so
1 Like
Lightning network is a second layer protocol. Segwit made it easier and safer to implement 
1 Like
Why? Keeping the network backwards compatible doesn’t really pose a security risk
1 Like
- A hard fork with a larger block size, such as Bitcoin Cash
- SegWit supports the development of second layer protocols which made services like MAST and the lightning network possible, which could be built on top of the primary node
- The lightening network is only possible because SegWit made second layer protocols possible
- No, only about 14% of transactions were using the protocol as of Feb 2018 and adoption of SegWit has been slow
1 Like
- proposed alternative to Segwit was to increase block size to 2 MB Which led to the hard fork that made Bitcoin Cash
- Segwit also solves problem of TX malleability by removing scriptSig from the block’s hash
- Segwit made lightning network possible
- people, wallets and other services are not forced to use Segwit
1 Like
-
A proposed alternative was to increase the block size which would cause a hard fork.
-
SegWit also solved the protocol bug of transaction malleability, the ability to make small changes in the signature.
-
SegWit made it possible for BTC to support development of layer 2 protocols like the Lightning Network.
-
No, SegWit is a soft fork so it is compatible with previous protocols.
1 Like
- block size increase - like the hard fork which lead to bitcoin cash
- it solved the tx malleability
- Segwit made lightning possible
- no
1 Like
- What was a proposed alternative to Segwit?
Increasing the size but it just kicks the can down the hill - What did Segwit solve more than just the scaling issue?
Separating the Signature from the UTXO in the transaction ID hash makes easier to find back any transaction id for validation - How is Segwit and the Lightning network connected? Lightning is a L2 protocol network made possible by the SegWit solution. SegWit do compromise on security to help speed.
- Are people, wallets and other services forced to use Segwit? As a Soft Fork, no one is forced to use it. BTW, it seems to simplify the block so it is imposing by itself
1 Like
-
proosed alternate to segwit was to increase the maximum limit of mB that block can be. qhich was tempoeary and would cause hard fork
-
it also solve the transactiona malleability issue, where people could use signuters included in the block to cheat
-
Lightning network is possible because of segwit.
-
bo they are not. but most of wallets and miners are implementing segwit as it is optimal solution.
1 Like
Larger block size was an alternate proposal to segwit.
It solved the malleable issue, the problem with signatures being malleable.
Segwit supports 2nd layer protocols like lightning network, allowing lightning to work with the bitcoin protocol.
No one is forced to use segwit, but it is becoming more and more popular, dominating transactions.
1 Like
- Increase the Bitcoin block size from 1MB to 2MB. A hard fork solution that many considered a temporary solution to address the full block problem.
2.Transaction Malleability. a slight change to scriptSig of an unconfirmed transaction where the transaction itself remains unchanged cause the transaction’s original TXID changed to a different TXID. If this transaction is confirmed, the recipient of this transaction can request for another payment since the transaction become untraceable (changed TXID) any subsequent transactions based on this transaction will become invalid. Another reason to wait for confirmations.
-
Segwit fixed the transaction malleability issue for unconfirmed bitcoin transactions and lightning network relay on off-chain transactions to function. Without Segwit, it would not have been possible to implement the lightning network.
-
Segwit is a soft fork. The old version is compatible with Segwit so there’s no need to upgrade if you don’t want to use it. The legacy address can send and receive to Segwit address and vice versa.
1 Like
- Increasing the maximum block size from 1MB to 2MB
- Transaction malleability - transaction IDs aren’t affected by signature or script changes
- Segwit enabled second layer protocols, such as the Lightning network, to exist
- No, it was a soft fork, so wallets using the old protocol can still work with Segwit
1 Like
- bigger block size limit.
- It solved Transaction Malleability issue.
- Segwit made lightning network possible.
- no it was a soft fork. Wallets are adding support though.
1 Like
Increasing the block size limit.
It solved transaction malleability where a transaction recipient could alter the transaction ID signature and in turn, the hash.
The transaction malleability issue did not allow for second layer protocols to be built on top of the bitcoin blockchain. Segwit solved the transaction malleability issue hence allowing the second layer protocol Lightning network to be utilized.
Segwit style transactions are optional.
1 Like
-
Increasing the block size was an alternative to Segwit that was proposed; It gained enough support to hard fork into what we now know as “bitcoin cash”.
-
The transaction malleability problem.
-
The malleability fix made any feature that relied on unconfirmed transactions less risky and easier to design.
-
No, segwit was implemented as a soft fork; It fits within the old protocol.
1 Like
- Alternative to Segwit was a proposal to increase the block size limit.
- It solved also the Transaction malleability and the abillity to add the second layer protocols and smart contracts.
- Segwit enabled the development of second layer solutions such as lightning network.
- It really depends if we get version of the blockchain at the end -> If 50% of the nodes or 50% of the haspower updated to Segwit, then there would be no additional fork and remaining nodes would need to update in order to participate in the same blockchain. If there were less than 50% hashpower that updated it would result in 2 forks and then nodes could choose which blockchain to follow.
For people, wallets and services i dont think they re forced to use Segwit, as the update occured how the nodes read the transactions, so the transactions being broadcasted by wallets dont need to update. Please correct me if im wrong.
1 Like