Quote from: knightdk on March 17, 2016, 02:10:07 AM

Quote from: jl777 on March 17, 2016, 02:02:35 AM

luke-jr told me it takes 2 bytes per tx and 1 byte per vin extra using segwit as opposed to a 2MB hardfork. I thought you also confirmed this. Now you are saying that using segwit reduces the total permanent space used by 30%, if that is really the case then I will change my view.

please explain to me how lukejr is wrong when he says it takes 2 bytes per tx and 1 byte per vin. i will update the title to match my understanding, without shame when I see my mistake. Imagine I am like rainman. I just care about the numbers

Where did luke-jr tell you this? Did he explain why? I don't understand the 1 byte per vin part and would like to see the explanation for it.

What gmaxwell is saying is that segwit allows for future upgrades. One of those future upgrades could be an upgrade to a different signature scheme which does have the 30% reduction.

luke-jr: https://www.reddit.com/r/Bitcoin/comments/4amg1f/iguana_bitcoin_full_node_developer_jl777_argues/d12bcz7

plz note i didnt start any of the reddit threads, they seem to spontaneously start

OK, so maybe the fact that I am trying to analyze what segwit softfork in the upcoming weeks will do, that explains my not understanding that future upgrades with a new signature scheme are part of the analysis... Would these changes require a hardfork, or the usual softfork can change the signature scheme? It is kind of hard to analyze something based on unspecified future upgrades with a different signature scheme.

maybe there can be just a single aggregated signature for all the tx in a block? I have no idea if that is possible, but if it is, then that could be added to the coinbase and then we wont need any witness data at all. Did I get that right?