Happy Anniversary, SEGWIT!

[Maestro75]

Till date am yet to understand the importance of Segwit to the blockchain. I think it is more of a hype than function and use. It is more noise than facts. Even the Segwit to Segwit transfers do not process that fast.

[1715213007]

1715213007

[1715213007]

1715213007

[1715213007]

1715213007

[1715213007]

1715213007

[1715213007]

1715213007

[1715213007]

1715213007

[squatter]

Till date am yet to understand the importance of Segwit to the blockchain. I think it is more of a hype than function and use. It is more noise than facts. Even the Segwit to Segwit transfers do not process that fast.

Segwit transactions are still on-chain Bitcoin transactions -- beyond the moderate fee savings, they are no different than standard transactions in terms of speed. The point was never to speed up on-chain transactions, which are always subject to the fee market and Bitcoin's 10-minute target block time. It was more about enabling/supporting future features -- Lightning, Schnorr signatures, sidechains, MAST smart contracts -- by adding script versioning and solving transaction malleability for Segwit transactions.

[Wind_FURY]

Sorry franky1, we have debated about that many times. I cannot accept something wrong as something right. Read this if want to criticize Lightning, https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5170358.msg52165227#msg52165227

That's what I dislike in blockchain. Developers would say something, get criticized, and then declare that something else was their original intention.

so khaos and you were talking about IOU. and you rebuttled with a quote about capacity.

No. My last post in that topic was my criticism. Kolos79 misinforms. Anything that come out of him are lies to trick the newbies, or to annoy everyone. But I'm never annoyed of anyone. I say bring it on, all the misinformation, and the gaslighting.

But read my criticism, it's the last post I made in this topic, https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5170358.msg52165227#msg52165227

Till date am yet to understand the importance of Segwit to the blockchain. I think it is more of a hype than function and use. It is more noise than facts. Even the Segwit to Segwit transfers do not process that fast.

Congratulations. You are on the path to learn Bitcoin. The hard way.

Sorry franky1, we have debated about that many times. I cannot accept something wrong as something right. Read this if want to criticize Lightning, https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5170358.msg52165227#msg52165227

That's what I dislike in blockchain. Developers would say something, get criticized, and then declare that something else was their original intention.

Thing is WindFury, you lost the debate each time, you're just too stupid to comprehend it. 

Eat all the crayons you want, you're still wrong. But do continue your misinformation rampage, and get as much newbies to learn from you. Let them learn the hard way.

[Tipstar]

wow. It's amazing to realize that segwit is just 2 years old and 90% of people and business I know has already moved towards segwit. We'd again need similar collective effort towards the adoption of an improved version of Lightning network. But for that we should improve the lightning network first.

[pooya87]

Till date am yet to understand the importance of Segwit to the blockchain. I think it is more of a hype than function and use. It is more noise than facts. Even the Segwit to Segwit transfers do not process that fast.

Segwit transactions are still on-chain Bitcoin transactions -- beyond the moderate fee savings, they are no different than standard transactions in terms of speed. The point was never to speed up on-chain transactions, which are always subject to the fee market and Bitcoin's 10-minute target block time. It was more about enabling/supporting future features -- Lightning, Schnorr signatures, sidechains, MAST smart contracts -- by adding script versioning and solving transaction malleability for Segwit transactions.

"transaction speed" is two things:
* the propagation speed which is the time it takes for a tx to reach nearly all the nodes. and it only takes a couple of seconds. it is equivalent of the bank sending a money transfer to another account in another bank for example which can take a day or two.
* the confirmation time which is the time it takes for a tx to be include in a block and it is limited by the time between the blocks. and that is equivalent of your bank transfer becoming final and irreversible and that could take months.
neither of these have anything to do with SegWit though.
these are benefits of SegWit: https://bitcoincore.org/en/2016/01/26/segwit-benefits/

and by the way it did not enable any of the things you listed. it is supposed to make them easier otherwise all of them (LN, Schnorr,...) can happen without SegWit but harder because there are complications such as malleability. for instance Bcash has already enabled Schnorr although it has also implemented most of SegWit but it is technically without SegWit

[Wind_FURY]

Eat all the crayons you want, you're still wrong. But do continue your misinformation rampage, and get as much newbies to learn from you. Let them learn the hard way.

You know, you're so stupid , it is a wonder you know how to breathe,

Yes I am, and you are the smart one.

Newbies, listen to him.

Anyone that reads what I wrote does learn, while you're post are pure bullshit indoctrination into the bitcoin fanatics fantasy club.

In your stupidity, you think that Tandy 1000 non-mining node is worth something , and it's not.  

It is important to me, and it should be important to thousands of others who run their own nodes. The nodes receive transactions, and blocks, they validate, and relay if they are valid.

You said that mining is centralized to 4 pools. Do those 4 pools' nodes are the only nodes that matter?

You can't see an IOU system when it is thrown in your face.

Sad part is you seem unable to learn any way at all.  

I believe I would see an IOU system if I see one, but you haven't showed me one.

Plus good news, Segwit is 61% of Bitcoin transactions.

[andreibi]

Well, having segwit is better than no update for five long years. The debates have lasted so long on whether to do everything onchain or use layers on top of the Bitcoin blockchain instead.

[Carlton Banks]

Plus good news, Segwit is 61% of Bitcoin transactions.

seems a bit vague as a statistic

https://p2sh.info has more specific headings for their charts, and their Segwit usage charts show:

• 30-40% in fees are spent on segwit transctions
• 30-40% of the bytes in a block are from segwit transctions
• 40-50% of transactions include a segwit input
• 60-90% of BTC sent is from a segwit input
• Blocks are averaging about 1.3MB as a result (peak size 2.1MB)
• Tx/day peaked at over 500,000 (a little less meaningful now more batching is happening)

It would be interesting to see how many outputs per day are being sent, that's a better yardstick than any of the previous stats (athough they're all interesting/useful)


However, the success of segwit is far from total:

• 1.8% of outputs on the blockchain are bech32 (i.e. native segwit)
• 1.7% of outputs on the blockchain are P2SH-P2WPKH (i.e. nested segwit)

so 3.5% of BTC is kept permanently in segwit addresses, although the rate at which people are putting funds in segwit  addresses is gradually speeding up (again, as seen at https://p2sh.info)

so that means that the people who send Bitcoin everyday (i.e. in commerce) are taking the opportunity to use segwit to keep their costs low. But hodlers are just sticking with their long term addresses, why move your money if it's not needed? That makes sense, when people holding Bitcoin long term need to use it, they may well take the opportunity to save on future transaction fees. If they've heard about schnorr and other fee saving upgrades (as well as privacy improvements in e.g. taproot), they have even more reason to wait until absolutely necessary before switching long-term savings into new address types


to summarize:

• Segwit dominates daily payments on the network, but not completely (~55%)
• Compressed key P2PKH (i.e. legacy addresses everyone is most familiar with) dominates dormant money that doesn't move, and it does that almost completely (~97%)

and I'm totally happy: blocks are kept small-ish because of more heavily weighted inputs still existing so abundantly. Compromise: achieved

[squatter]

Till date am yet to understand the importance of Segwit to the blockchain. I think it is more of a hype than function and use. It is more noise than facts. Even the Segwit to Segwit transfers do not process that fast.

Segwit transactions are still on-chain Bitcoin transactions -- beyond the moderate fee savings, they are no different than standard transactions in terms of speed. The point was never to speed up on-chain transactions, which are always subject to the fee market and Bitcoin's 10-minute target block time. It was more about enabling/supporting future features -- Lightning, Schnorr signatures, sidechains, MAST smart contracts -- by adding script versioning and solving transaction malleability for Segwit transactions.

"transaction speed" is two things:
* the propagation speed which is the time it takes for a tx to reach nearly all the nodes. and it only takes a couple of seconds. it is equivalent of the bank sending a money transfer to another account in another bank for example which can take a day or two.
* the confirmation time which is the time it takes for a tx to be include in a block and it is limited by the time between the blocks.

I was obviously referring to the confirmation time. I don't think any newbies complaining about transaction speed are referring to propagation time.

and by the way it did not enable any of the things you listed. it is supposed to make them easier otherwise all of them (LN, Schnorr,...) can happen without SegWit but harder because there are complications such as malleability.

I thought that was adequately covered by "enabling/supporting." If an implementation of Lightning relies on Segwit, e.g. to fix transaction malleability, then the choice of words was correct. Sure, we could have implemented LN long before Segwit but the UX would have been absolutely horrible. What's your point?

[Carlton Banks]

i beg you chaps to chafe my oily sphincter with a cheese grater while i piss on your grandma's hairy belly

please! you're as disgusting as them!

save it for the troll bukkake

[Wind_FURY]

Late Bump.

Did we forget? I honestly did forget, BUT we shouldn't forget, and how the community resisted the Oligarchs, and the Mining Cartels.

Happy Anniversary Segwit! Read OP, and never be gaslighted.