Segwit Reading Assignment

Blockchain and Bitcoin 101
#1826
  1. To increase the block size limit.
  2. SegWit fixed the transaction malleability issue.
  3. By fixing the transaction malleability issue, SegWig made second layer protocols, such as the Lightning Network, less risky and easier to implement.
  4. No, they are not forced to use SegWit, as SegWit was deployed as a soft fork update (or kind of?).
1 Like
#1827

1-make the blocks bigger
2-solves the problem of the malleability transaction and leaves more space for a second layer
3-Segwit makes a second layer possible
4- no, but may or may not be implemented

1 Like
#1828

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

a.just simply increasing the block size from 1Mb to 2Mb or Even more

b.Malleability

c.As far as i searched about lightening it doesn’t go through block chain but it skirts it and its a layer 2protocol that operates on top of block chain, and its an unstructured node/network and works independantly to solve the issue of scaling problem, also takes the transactions of the blockchain and is in need of support from Segwit

d.since segwite is a soft work not all nodes need to use the servics
:smiley:

1 Like
#1829

  1. The proposed alternative to Segwit was to implement a larger size block, part of the bitcoin community thought Segwit as a “temporary fix”. Resistance to Segwit was one of the factors behind the development of the fork “Bitcoin cash”.

  2. Segwit also solves Txs malleability by removing the signature information and storing it outside the transaction block which allows support of the second layer protocols like lightning protocol, which increases speed and reduces fees on the network.

  3. Segwit by removing the signature from the transaction block allow the support second layer protocol like “lightning protocol” which is neither a softfork nor a hardfork but an “additional layer”.

4.Segwit update is a “softfork” and it allows nodes to choose.

1 Like
#1830

  1. Increasing the block size to 2MB.

  2. Segwit solved the transaction malleability issue by removing the signature information.

  3. Segwit made possible and supported the lighting network by small transactions off-chain and settling them on the blockchain when the users are ready.

  4. People were not forced to use Seqwit. It was a soft fork.

1 Like
#1831
  1. What was a proposed alternative to Segwit?
  • Instead of changing the block TX structure opponents like Bitcoin Cash opted to implement a larger block size limit instead.
  1. What did Segwit solve more than just the scaling issue?
  • It also halts Tx malleability (the ability to change a tx ID)
  1. How is Segwit and the Lightning network connected?
  • segwit got rid of the malleability issue and as a result allowed for easier and ‘more trustworthy’ design of layer 2 protocols.
  1. Are people, wallets and other services forced to use Segwit?
  • No, but everyone is/was encouraged to do so as only then the full benefit would come into play.
1 Like
#1832

  1. What was a proposed alternative to Segwit?
    To increased the block size from 1 MB to 2MB.

  2. What did Segwit solve more than just the scaling issue?
    -with Segwit having an unconfirmed TX it’s more safe.
    -Since the signature it’s been separated from the TX, you can’t change the TX hash by changing the signature.
    -TX are smaller and can fit more of them in a block.
    -Smaller TX will be off-chain only setting on the btc blockchain when users need them.

  3. How is Segwit and the Lightning network connected?
    Lightning network it’s created by Segwit to keep optimising the space in the blocks by separating frequent, small TX off-chain.

  4. Are people, wallets and other services forced to use Segwit?
    No, since it’s been design to be a soft fork the upgrade it’s voluntary. Still been a small percent of people with the Segwit update.

1 Like
#1833

1.- The proposed alternative for the scaling solution of Bitcoin was increasing the block size from 1MB to 2MB.
2.- Segwit not only provided a solution for the scaling Bitcoin issue, but also addressed the problem of transaction malleability.
3.- Segwit implementation made it possible for the Lightning Network to become a reality due to the transaction malleability issue.
4.- People are not forced to use Segwit; however, as adoption continues there seems to be wallet versions of Segwit that are not backward compatible.

1 Like
#1834
  1. Increasing block size.
  2. By removing signature from TX, the malleability problem is solved.
  3. Segwit makes layer 2 solutions such as the Lightning network possible.
  4. No, but full implementation is good for the overall health of the network, but to achieve lowering fees and increased TX speed, adoption is necessary.
1 Like
#1835
  1. A proposed alternative to Segwit was Bitcoin Cash, making the block size bigger.
  2. Besides Scaling issue, Segwit solves TX malleability.
  3. Segwit enables Lightening network resolving the scaling problem by enabeling low fee TX to occur “off chain”.
  4. People, wallets and other services are not forced to use Segwit.
1 Like
#1836

  1. A proposed alternative to Segwit was to only make the blocks larger in size.

  2. Segwit solved more than just the scaling issue by also negating transaction malleability and by making transactions happen much faster and be much cheaper.

  3. Segwit and the Lightning network are connected because Segwit makes it so that you can now trust unconfirmed transactions, making second layer protocols(Lightning network) viable.

  4. People, wallets and other services are not forced to use Segwit because the nature of the fork is soft.

1 Like
#1837

  • What was a proposed alternative to Segwit?
    Increasing the size of the blocks to from 1MB to 2MB.

  • What did Segwit solve more than just the scaling issue?
    Fixed transactions malleability.

  • How is Segwit and the Lightning network connected?
    Segwit supports the development of a second layer protocols such as the Lightening network.

  • Are people, wallets and other services forced to use Segwit?
    No, not forced, but it’s and advantage, so I believe that the majority will use it.

1 Like
#1838
  1. Increase Block size limit.
  2. It solved Bitcoin’s transaction malleability issue
  3. Segwit supports developments of layer 2 solutions like Lightning network.
  4. No, they aren’t forced to use yet. Many wallets still don’t support Segwit yet.
1 Like
#1839
  1. Increasing the maximum block size to two megabytes.
  2. Segwit resolved the transaction malleability issue.
  3. Segwit supports the development of second layer protocols such as Lightning network.
  4. No. Participation has increased over time.
1 Like
#1840
  1. What was a proposed alternative to Segwit?

Hard fork bitcoin with increased block size, like btc cash for example.

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

A security issue, becuase the signature was not part of the hash anymore.

  1. How is Segwit and the Lightning network connected?

Lightning is built on top of segwit. Otherwise it’s extremely unclear to me. It takes smaller transactions off chain. I mean how and why is that even possible?

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

It was a soft fork, so it depends on the adoption.

1 Like
#1841
  1. Raising the block size was proposed as an alternative to Segwit.
  2. Segwit also solved the transaction malleability issue.
  3. Segwit and the lightning network are connected because Segwit fixed the malleability issue which made unconfirmed off-chain transactions less risky and Lightning network takes small frequent repetitive transactions and processes them off-chain and then settles up on-chain when you are ready.
  4. Because Segwit was a soft fork the old blocks are still compatible so people are not forced to use Segwit.
1 Like
#1842
  1. What was a proposed alternative to Segwit?
    -the increase of block size
  2. What did Segwit solve more than just the scaling issue?
    -they solve the issue of Transaction malleability.
  3. How is Segwit and the Lightning network connected?
    -The segwit make second layer possible.
  4. Are people, wallets and other services forced to use Segwit?
    -No, they are not forced, it is optional.
1 Like
#1843

1-> Expanding the block size to 2MB or higher

2-> Solve the transaction malleability

3-> Throug a second layer protocol

4-> .Nope, it is a option for the users when the service (wallet etc) is updated

1 Like
#1844
  1. What was a proposed alternative to Segwit?

The proposed alternative was to increase the Block size from 1MB to 2MB.

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

Segwit was actually intended to solve the transaction malleability bug in bitcoin’s code.

  1. How is Segwit and the Lightning network connected?

Implementing the Segwit update opened up the scope for second layer protocol. Lighting Network is an example for second layer protocol.

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

Segwit was a soft fork update, so people are not forced to use the Segwit update.

1 Like
#1845

[quote=“filip, post:1, topic:8408”]

  • What was a proposed alternative to Segwit?
    To increase the block size from 1mb to 2mb

  • What did Segwit solve more than just the scaling issue?
    It prevented transaction malleability by removing the signature from the transaction record

  • How is Segwit and the Lightning network connected?
    Segwit allows layer 2 solutions like lightening to exist

  • Are people, wallets and other services forced to use Segwit?
    No segwit was a soft fork and is backwards compatible so nodes that use segwit can still interact with nodes that don’t

1 Like