- Increase the block size
- The transaction malleability
- Lightning Network is possible as 2nd layer solution due to segwit
- No
1 Like
increase in BTC block size which is 1MB now.
Segwit also fixed malleability by removing the signature information [ witness information] and storing it out the base block.
Segwit and lightening network are connected in that Segwit supports the development of second layer protocols, such as lightening network.
no they are not .
1 Like
What was a proposed alternative to Segwit?
To move the signatures outside the transactions so the size is smaller and they can fit more tx on a 1mb block
What did Segwit solve more than just the scaling issue?
Segwit as well fixed a small box related to transaction malleability
How is Segwit and the Lightning network connected?
Segwite paved the foundation for the development of the Lightning network
Are people, wallets and other services forced to use Segwit?
Moving to Segwit is optional
1 Like
- increasing in block size limit.
2.The transaction malleability. - Segwit (Segregated Witness) slove the issues of transaction malleability and full block problem by removing the signature from transaction data structures and this leads more txs in a block and also smaller size of blocks which can propagate in the network in shorter times.
4.No , but some of known wallets have already support and working on it.
- The proposed alternative to Segwit was an increase in the block size increase.
- The second thing Segwit solved was transaction malleability and allowing Complex 2nd layer features such as protocols and protocols and smart contracts allowing project to be more than just the scaling issue.
- How is Segwit and the Lightning network connected because it allows 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.
- No Segwit does not force people, wallets and other services to use Segwit because it is a soft fork.
1. What was a proposed alternative to Segwit?
Increase the block size limit which was resulted in the creation of Bitcoin Cash
2. What did Segwit solve more than just the scaling issue?
Transaction Malleability by removing the signature from the base transaction block. Signatures can still be changed but won’t change the transaction id.
3. How is Segwit and the Lightning network connected?
Segwit allowed the development Lightning network because it made it less risky and easier for second layer protocols to be designed.
4. Are people, wallets and other services forced to use Segwit?
No it was a soft fork.
1 Like
-
What was a proposed alternative to Segwit?
Answer; To decrease the size of the block so that more tx could be added to the block -
What did Segwit solve more than just the scaling issue?
Answer: It addressed the Transaction Malleability - changing the signature which would change the Tx ID so they removed it -
How is Segwit and the Lightning network connected?
Answer: It made it possible for the lightning network to as a 2nd layer protocol -
Are people, wallets and other services forced to use Segwit?
Answer: No because it was a soft fork as it was compatible with the prior protocal.
1 Like
- Increasing block size.
- Malliability and supports scaling solutions.
- Without segwit you couldn’t use the lighting network.
- No it was a soft fork.
1 Like
- What was a proposed alternative to Segwit? Increasing the block size
- What did Segwit solve more than just the scaling issue? transaction malleability
- How is Segwit and the Lightning network connected? Segwit support the development of the lightning network.
- Are people, wallets and other services forced to use Segwit? no
1 Like
-
Increase the block size from 1MB to 2MB
-
Segwit also solved the issue of malleable signatures.
-
The malleability fix of Segwit made the second layer addition of the Lightning network possible for less risky unconfirmed transactions and better ease of design.
-
No people, wallets or other services are forced to use Segwit (soft fork). But, they need to jump on the Segwit train, if they don’t want to be left behind!
1 Like
-
Increasing the block size too 2mb.
-
It solved transaction malleability by making it so the transaction signature could not be changed.
-
Segwit made second layers possible.
-
No, it is a soft fork.
1 Like
-
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?
-
It was proposed to increase the block size as an alternative to Segwit.
-
Aside from the scaling issue, Segwit also solved the issue of ScriptSigs being modified.
-
Segwit made Lightning network more of a possibility by supporting the development of second layer protocols.
-
People, wallets and services are not forced to use Segwit since it was a soft fork and it still falls within the old protocol’s consensus rules.
1 Like
- Increased block size therefore creating a hard fork.
- TX malleability.
- It provide a second layer for the network to be connected.
- No.
1 Like
- What was a proposed alternative to Segwit?
Increased block size was an alternative proposal. Bitcoin Cash went this way that resulted in a hard fork.
- What did Segwit solve more than just the scaling issue?
Because the witness / signature is moved outside of the transaction body changing it won’t cause the transaction hash / id to change.
- How is Segwit and the Lightning network connected?
L2 solutions became possible after moving the witness outside the TX.
- Are people, wallets and other services forced to use Segwit?
No, but to benefit the end user with reduced TX fees it’s good to do so.
1 Like
-
What was a proposed alternative to Segwit?
An increased block size most likely resulting in a hardfork. -
What did Segwit solve more than just the scaling issue?
Segwit solved the transaction malleability issue by segregating the transaction signatures from the block data. -
How is Segwit and the Lightning network connected?
The implementation of Segwit makes the Lightning Network possible. -
Are people, wallets and other services forced to use Segwit?
Segwit is a softfork, so it will be accepted by the non updated nodes. Nothing is forced.
1 Like
- Increasing the block size.
- Fixed transaction malleability by removing the signature information outside the base transaction block.
- Without the signature information the transaction become lighter so more transactions can be included in a block. The lightning network takes smaller transactions off-chain to increase the transaction capacity. Both the lightning network and Segwit increased the second layer capacity of the blockchain and allows more complex bitcoin smart contracts.
- No, bitcoin cash can be used instead as it a fork that implements a larger block size instead of the Segwit transaction structure.
1 Like
Hi fellow classmate! Do you mean increase the block size? You wrote decrease.
1 Like
- Bitcoin cash
- 2nd layer solutions are easier to create because of easier data structure and smaller risk. It fixed the BTC bug called transaction malleability.
- Lightning network could build on 2nd layer thanks to Segwit.
- No - as it is softfork.
1 Like
Old style transactions still work on Bitcoin as well. 
1 Like
- a Hard Fork (increasing the block size to 2Mb or larger)
- It solved the block size issue, as well as the Transaction Malleability “bug” that could open the system up to foul play
- The lightning network is enabled by SegWit. It relies on unconfirmed signatures, so now it’s easier to build and more secure. The Lightning Network takes frequent transactions offline until the users are ready to add them to the blockchain.
- No it’s a soft fork, although in my mind it’s essentially it’s an upgrade that should now be running on every wallet, node, SPV and the BTC main chain
1 Like