Quote from: franky1 on March 20, 2019, 09:06:52 PM

firstly
segwit has not fixed malleability.
it created a new TX format that people can use to (at the time) show they cannot perform malleability.
a. people could continue to use old legacy tx formats and still malleate
b. recently due to new feature needs. core devs introduced a new sighash opcode that actually allows segwit tx's to malleate again..

secondly
the wishy washy code of witness scale factor. does not actually give more transaction capacity per real hard drive storage bytes of full block data.
stripped blocks do not contain signature data to validate a tx is truly authentic. thus having a node storing stripped data is not a guarantee to hold valid data or a ability to relay full data to real full nodes. thus no point being a node messing with stripped data

thirdly
the purpose of segwit is actually to change bitcoin to have a new gateway tx format that would allow features to be done that would suit another network (LN)

fourthly
segwit was conceived to edit bitcoin to give bitcoin a doorway to an alternative network.
the other network was not edited to be purely bitcoin functional
the esssence is to eventually persuade users to de-burden themselves of using the bitcoin network and use another network. thus reduce bitcoin networks utility

Thanks for your message, here what we think:

1) SegWit by itself is a fix, albeit a nonobligatory one, and that is its main feature.
Please tell us which opcode you are referring to. If what you are stating is indeed true we can include that in the article, because such information is hard to come by.

2) It was mentioned in the article that the signature data is still stored on the blockchain. The issue you're referring to is indeed relevant, but nodes that do not have access to the signature data can simply "wait it out" until enough confirmations are acquired.

3) The number 1 purpose of SegWit (stated in the full text of BIP 141) is to ensure that "Nonintentional malleability becomes impossible".

4) Again, none of this contradicts the article, except for the last sentence. The network's utility is actually enhanced by these alternative networks as Bitcoin (in its current form) has become too expensive and overcrowded for the majority of its daily users.