As a key upgrade of the Bitcoin network, Bitcoin Segregated Witness (SegWit) has triggered widespread controversy and discussion. SegWit aims to solve the scaling problems faced by Bitcoin and improve transaction processing speed and network security. However, it was the introduction of this technology that sparked a series of heated disputes. This article will delve into the definition, implementation and controversy of Bitcoin Segregated Witness, and reveal the truth behind it.

Bitcoin SegWit is a technology upgrade designed to optimize the way Bitcoin transactions are processed. In traditional Bitcoin transactions, transaction data and signature information are packaged together into blocks, occupying a limited block size and limiting the number of transactions that each block can accommodate, resulting in slow transaction speeds and high transaction fees. The emergence of SegWit technology separates and stores transaction data and signature information, allowing transaction data to be disseminated and processed more efficiently, thus improving the throughput and security of the Bitcoin network.

However, despite the many advantages that Bitcoin Segregated Witness technology has brought, it has also caused a series of controversies. One of the main controversies is over the way SegWit is implemented and the impact on the existing Bitcoin protocol. Some people believe that SegWit, implemented as a soft fork, may lead to network fragmentation and security issues, posing a threat to the decentralized nature of Bitcoin. On the other hand, those who support SegWit believe that the introduction of this technology is an inevitable choice for the development of Bitcoin, which can effectively solve the current expansion problem and lay the foundation for the future development of Bitcoin.

In addition to its implementation, Bitcoin Segwit also involves issues such as transaction fees and the distribution of miners’ interests. Some critics pointed out that the launch of SegWit may lead to a reduction in miners' income, affect the enthusiasm of miners, and thus affect the security and stability of the entire Bitcoin network. They worry that as transaction fees drop, miners may reduce their support for the Bitcoin network, and there may even be security risks such as "51% attacks." However, those who support SegWit believe that by optimizing transaction processing methods, SegWit can reduce transaction fees and improve user experience, thereby promoting the widespread application and development of Bitcoin.

Behind the constant controversy, the launch of Bitcoin SegWit has undoubtedly had a profound impact on the entire cryptocurrency field. As an important upgrade of the Bitcoin network, the launch of SegWit not only improves the transaction speed and security of Bitcoin, but also points the way for the future development of Bitcoin. However, how to balance the interests of all parties and resolve disputes is still an important issue facing the Bitcoin community.

In general, Bitcoin Segregated Witness, as an important technical upgrade of the Bitcoin network, has not only brought many advantages, but also caused widespread controversy. In the ever-evolving cryptocurrency field, the launch of SegWit is undoubtedly an important milestone in the development of Bitcoin. It also reminds people of the need to balance the relationship between technological development, community interests and network security to jointly promote the healthy development of the cryptocurrency industry. May Bitcoin Segwit bring more enlightenment and discussion and pave the way for the future of cryptocurrency.

The four most famous international exchanges:

Binance INTL	OKX INTL	Gate.io INTL	Huobi INTL
China Line　APP DL	China Line　APP DL	China Line　APP DL	China Line　APP DL

Note: The above exchange logo is the official website registration link, and the text is the APP download link.

What is Bitcoin Segwit? Segregated verification was initially considered to be an expansion plan for Bitcoin blocks, which would affect the size of Bitcoin blocks and would most likely cause Bitcoin to fork, triggering heated discussions in the community.

First, the mining company Bitmain was accused of blocking Segregated Witness out of self-interest. Later, several major Bitcoin companies and mining pools united to support their own expansion plan, Sigwit2x. In the end, some users were dissatisfied with this plan and turned to support users to activate soft fork plans.

There are three key points in isolation verification:

(1) Changed the storage method of data in Bitcoin blocks;

(2) The block capacity is increased and it is also compatible with old versions;

(3) Solve a major problem existing in many Bitcoin projects: transaction scalability;

continual struggle

Segregated Witness was created to optimize blockchain code and is the right choice from a technical perspective.

But some Bitcoin users always believed that the Segregated Witness solution was a wrong choice. They were stubborn and led to a hard fork of Bitcoin, which created a new chain called Bitcoin Cash (BCC).

Opposing views

The key points against SegWit can be roughly divided into three aspects: technical, political and ideological.

Technically

Some believe that in its current state SegWit fails to solve the problems it promises to solve. One of the main reasons for this view is that the increase in block size proposed by this update is not enough to meet the growing needs of Bitcoin’s user base.

Although most experts will agree on the superb technical capabilities of SegWit's formulators and the reliability of the technology itself. However, it is almost impossible for the average person without certain technical skills to assess the veracity of the arguments presented by both sides.

Politically

The fact that the current debate is not purely technical but also has political aspects only complicates matters. Many of the people working on SegWit are also employed by a company called Blockstream, whose main product is a sidechain solution.

Some in the community claim this creates a conflict of interest, as developers are incentivized to thwart attempts to increase block capacity, thereby artificially inflating demand for sidechain solutions like the Lightning Network. Although there is no conclusive evidence for this statement, a large part of the community still chooses to believe this and therefore opposes SegWit.

ideologically

The main ideological objection to this update is that it cannot provide scalability while ensuring a sufficient degree of decentralization of the Bitcoin network. As mentioned before, SegWit solves Bitcoin’s long-term problem of insufficient transaction capacity only to the extent of allowing the implementation of second-layer sidechain solutions such as the Lightning Network.

And some believe the problem here is how sidechains work. In order not to rely on highly congested blockchains, they move currency to second-layer systems. In this layer of the system, all transactions are processed by a trusted third party and do not have to be propagated throughout the network, thus saving a lot of resources and time.

But having a trusted authority responsible is exactly what Bitcoin wants to remove from the monetary system. For some, this compromise is unacceptable, no matter how little influence the third party exerts in the solution.
Big Fish believes that this is an insistence on "decentralization fundamentalism", which is somewhat similar to the original split of Ethereum into ETH and ETC.