My 2 big reasons why we should use SegWit addresses instead of Legacy addresses

hosseinimr93

legendary

Activity: 2380

Merit: 5213

Quote from: dansus021 on July 06, 2024, 08:23:11 AM

Second nowadays big exchange already accept deposit from segwit address so the transaction from segwit to segwit address heck binance also accept a lightning network

Since the day segwit addresses came into existence, all exchanges accept deposits from segwit addresses.
Take note that it's possible that a custodial service like an exchange doesn't allow you to withdraw your bitcoin to a certain type address, but they can't prevent you from making a deposit from a certain type of address.

dansus021

copper member

Activity: 2156

Merit: 983

Part of AOBT - English Translator to Indonesia

Using segwit has a lot of benefit like the thread starter say ealier. But for me segwit is everyday choice for me. If you look at the signature campaign most of the manager ask for the segwit one of the reason is cheap on fee especially if you have native segwit.

Second nowadays big exchange already accept deposit from segwit address so the transaction from segwit to segwit address heck binance also accept a lightning network

Porfirii

legendary

Activity: 2002

Merit: 2534

The Alliance Of Bitcointalk Translators - ENG>SPA

Quote from: Husna QA on July 02, 2024, 02:23:57 AM

Quote from: Porfirii on July 01, 2024, 11:58:44 AM

There is still another good reason to use legacy addresses, and it is because of vanity addresses. -snip-

I don't think vanity addresses are unique to Legacy addresses, as they can also be created from SegWit addresses. Here are some links to tools that can be used for this purpose:

- VanitySearch (https://github.com/JeanLucPons/VanitySearch)
- Vanitybech (https://github.com/MakisChristou/vanitybech)
- https://github.com/nym-zone/segvan (https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/segvan-segwit-vanity-address-bulk-address-generator-2934774)

Thank you for sharing these tools with us Husna

I will dig more into them this weekend when I have time, because I have always found it interesting but never created one myself before.

Although I didn't explain it right, what I was thinking about is in the case someone wanted to create vanity addresses starting by 1. AFAIK it is not possible to do that with segwit, is it?

mr.mister

full member

Activity: 302

Merit: 100

Quote from: satscraper on July 03, 2024, 08:40:37 AM

Quote from: mr.mister on July 03, 2024, 07:03:23 AM

I am sure in the future I will move to segwit, address that start with 3s, then to native segwit (bc1q) a few years later, and so on. This is the strategy that I deploy.

Strange scheme for me. Why not to move to bc1q addresses at once and escape the nested segwit stage? You would save some of your stash by doing so. This would be natural for the penny-savers, unless they wanna the extra payments to miners to appraise their job . Any plot from your part here?

Among all others mentioned in this thread advantages the native sigwit addresses (opposite to legacy ones ) use the small character set which eliminates error at transferring them viva voice.

As I tried to imply in my comment, I am not concerned with saving pennies. I am more concerned with security. I will move from one protocol to the next in the order that they have been around from oldest to newest. That is my strategy.

satscraper

hero member

Activity: 714

Merit: 1298

Quote from: mr.mister on July 03, 2024, 07:03:23 AM

I am sure in the future I will move to segwit, address that start with 3s, then to native segwit (bc1q) a few years later, and so on. This is the strategy that I deploy.

Strange scheme for me. Why not to move to bc1q addresses at once and escape the nested segwit stage? You would save some of your stash by doing so. This would be natural for the penny-savers, unless they wanna the extra payments to miners to appraise their job . Any plot from your part here?

Among all others mentioned in this thread advantages the native sigwit addresses (opposite to legacy ones ) use the small character set which eliminates error at transferring them viva voice.

mr.mister

full member

Activity: 302

Merit: 100

I am still on legacy because it has stood the test of time. It has been reliable and effective. I don't move my coins often, other than to consolidate to one UXTO when fees are cheap. I am sure in the future I will move to segwit, address that start with 3s, then to native segwit (bc1q) a few years later, and so on. This is the strategy that I deploy.

Husna QA

legendary

Activity: 2296

Merit: 2892

#SWGT CERTIK Audited

Quote from: Porfirii on July 01, 2024, 11:58:44 AM

There is still another good reason to use legacy addresses, and it is because of vanity addresses. -snip-

I don't think vanity addresses are unique to Legacy addresses, as they can also be created from SegWit addresses. Here are some links to tools that can be used for this purpose:

- VanitySearch (https://github.com/JeanLucPons/VanitySearch)
- Vanitybech (https://github.com/MakisChristou/vanitybech)
- https://github.com/nym-zone/segvan (https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/segvan-segwit-vanity-address-bulk-address-generator-2934774)

Porfirii

legendary

Activity: 2002

Merit: 2534

The Alliance Of Bitcointalk Translators - ENG>SPA

Quote from: PX-Z on June 28, 2024, 10:23:59 AM

Actually, everything about using segwit address are all about the pros/advantages than using the legacy one in terms of bitcoin wallet address. So there's no other valid excuse that is reasonable and should be considered for not using segwit address

Quote from: mu_enrico on June 28, 2024, 10:33:07 AM

Yep, for me (1) it's cheaper than legacy, and (2) it's already supported everywhere. It's not like a few years ago when I couldn't withdraw to bc1 addresses. Nowadays, I rarely see wallets with legacy addresses as their default.

The reason someone still uses the 1-addresses is probably that they already had them pre-fork and want to keep the coins unsplit.

There is still another good reason to use legacy addresses, and it is because of vanity addresses. We may want to use an address starting by 1 because we like the way it looks. And who knows, maybe in the future legacy addresses with transactions from certain datas or whatever may become collectibles. So in general segwit is better, but we shouldn't demonize legacy completely.

Wind_FURY

legendary

Activity: 2898

Merit: 1823

Quote from: SquirrelJulietGarden on June 28, 2024, 05:13:12 AM

Quote from: Wind_FURY on June 28, 2024, 04:33:51 AM

But perhaps for HODLing, it's probably better to merely use Legacy addresses. Why? Because they're technically the safest. The other address types are Soft Forks, and the Core Developers are human - there could be bugs. Plus because HODLing is merely for the sake of the HODL, you don't need those extra features in Segwit or Taproot.

It is merely Conspiracy theory with some foundations to back behind but if bugs can cause bitcoin loss stored in addresses with Segwit or Taproot, many people already lost their bitcoins.

If the theory is bug can cause it, Bitcoin Legacy addresses can be compromised too and with more developer contributions, more decentralized nowadays, my theory is it can be safer than in the past with limited developers contributed to Bitcoin developments.

If I have big fund in bitcoin, I will decentralize my fund in Legacy, Segwit addresses.

I'm not talking about loss of funds, just mere bugs that might complicate the way you HODL Bitcoin and that could force you to transfer your coins back to legacy addresses. Plus although this is very VERY improbable, but because Segwit was a Soft Fork, there could be a debate that it's possible that Bitcoin could be changed back to the way it was before Segwit addresses. That's probably only going to happen if a super exploit of some sort was found - although VERY unlikely there's one.

mu_enrico

copper member

Activity: 2324

Merit: 2142

Slots Enthusiast & Expert

Yep, for me (1) it's cheaper than legacy, and (2) it's already supported everywhere. It's not like a few years ago when I couldn't withdraw to bc1 addresses. Nowadays, I rarely see wallets with legacy addresses as their default.

The reason someone still uses the 1-addresses is probably that they already had them pre-fork and want to keep the coins unsplit.

PX-Z

hero member

Activity: 1554

Merit: 880

Notify wallet transaction @txnNotifierBot

Actually, everything about using segwit address are all about the pros/advantages than using the legacy one in terms of bitcoin wallet address. So there's no other valid excuse that is reasonable and should be considered for not using segwit address

Yamane_Keto

hero member

Activity: 630

Merit: 510

An additional advantage of SegWit is that if your wallet is not able to generate SegWit addresses, it is best to avoid using it as the code has not been modified in a while or the developers need to have a real reason to update to SegWit addresses.

promise444c5

sr. member

Activity: 476

Merit: 299

Learning never stops!

Quote from: Wind_FURY on June 28, 2024, 04:33:51 AM

Quote

My 2 big reasons why we should use SegWit addresses instead of Legacy addresses

1. SegWit transaction are cheapest

2. Increased Block Capacity

But perhaps for HODLing, it's probably better to merely use Legacy addresses. Why? Because they're technically the safest. The other address types are Soft Forks, and the Core Developers are human - there could be bugs. Plus because HODLing is merely for the sake of the HODL, you don't need those extra features in Segwit or Taproot.

For Holders using lumpsum maybe... but for DCA investors, it might be bad interm of fees even if they will be consolidating their inputs from time to time.
Everything needs an upgrade as it becomes widely accepted, for example all versions of programming Languages were subjected to upgrade to form a better version ...
Development in Bitcoin space brought about better versions like the Segwit era... as times goes on,much advance stuff will continue to add up ... There might even come a time when bitcoin Legacy address will be converted to new ones in such a way that it's compatible with old Legacy address without having to make a transaction to the new one (just a thesis don'tknow if this might be possible)I.e automatically given new address + their old address (transaction will only reveal the new address)

SquirrelJulietGarden

hero member

Activity: 1442

Merit: 775

Quote from: Wind_FURY on June 28, 2024, 04:33:51 AM

But perhaps for HODLing, it's probably better to merely use Legacy addresses. Why? Because they're technically the safest. The other address types are Soft Forks, and the Core Developers are human - there could be bugs. Plus because HODLing is merely for the sake of the HODL, you don't need those extra features in Segwit or Taproot.

It is merely Conspiracy theory with some foundations to back behind but if bugs can cause bitcoin loss stored in addresses with Segwit or Taproot, many people already lost their bitcoins.

If the theory is bug can cause it, Bitcoin Legacy addresses can be compromised too and with more developer contributions, more decentralized nowadays, my theory is it can be safer than in the past with limited developers contributed to Bitcoin developments.

If I have big fund in bitcoin, I will decentralize my fund in Legacy, Segwit addresses.

Wind_FURY

legendary

Activity: 2898

Merit: 1823

Quote

My 2 big reasons why we should use SegWit addresses instead of Legacy addresses

1. SegWit transaction are cheapest

2. Increased Block Capacity

But perhaps for HODLing, it's probably better to merely use Legacy addresses. Why? Because they're technically the safest. The other address types are Soft Forks, and the Core Developers are human - there could be bugs. Plus because HODLing is merely for the sake of the HODL, you don't need those extra features in Segwit or Taproot.

dkbit98

legendary

Activity: 2212

Merit: 7064

Quote from: Phu Juck on June 26, 2024, 10:58:26 AM

Which ones are your favorite reasons to use Bitcoin native SegWit addresses?

There is no much difference compared to other address formats, but I guess with new format there is a bit smaller transaction fees.
Nobody in 2024 should be generating new Legacy addresses anymore and many bitcoin wallets removed this option (from GUI) like Electrum wallet.
However, it's perfectly fine to still use legacy addresses if you have coins stored a long time as a cold storage and you don't want to move them to new addresses.

Real advancement we have with Silent Payments (BIP352) that have much better privacy, but it's not yet supported in all wallets, and it's still in beta.
Silent Payment addresses all start with sp1.

OcTradism

hero member

Activity: 1722

Merit: 801

Quote from: Forsyth Jones on June 26, 2024, 05:48:17 PM

I think I've been using Segwit bech32 since 2018. I still used legacy for a while, in this year I tested bech32m, but I didn't see much of an advantage in terms of transaction weight/reduced fee.

As bech32m is taproot, perhaps its advantage is to aggregate several signatures into one, for example, if you receive several entries at a single address, perhaps when it comes to spending, it makes up for using bech32m. Someone correct me if I'm wrong.

Difference between transactions with Native Segwit bech32 bc1q and with Taproot bech32m bc1p is inputs and outputs.

With inputs, each Taproot input is 10.5 vbytes smaller than Native Segwit input but with each Taproot output, it is 12 vbytes bigger than a Native Segwit output.

So cheaper or more expensive, it depends on inputs and outputs of your transactions in Native Segwit or in Taproot.

https://bitcoinops.org/en/tools/calc-size/

hosseinimr93

legendary

Activity: 2380

Merit: 5213

Quote from: Zaguru12 on June 26, 2024, 12:05:55 PM

t is this SegWit transactions that is smaller in weight than legacy becaus legacy transactions is measured to weigh 4 units/byte and segwit weighs 1 unit/byte, and that’s why the corresponding transaction fees are smaller.

It's not that legacy transactions data weigh 4 times segwit transactions data. It's only the witness data that is counted differently.
The regular data of a segwit transaction is counted as legacy transactions and the witness data is counted as one quarter the size of the regular data.

Forsyth Jones

hero member

Activity: 1120

Merit: 540

Duelbits - Play for Free | Win for Real

I think I've been using Segwit bech32 since 2018. I still used legacy for a while, in this year I tested bech32m, but I didn't see much of an advantage in terms of transaction weight/reduced fee.

As bech32m is taproot, perhaps its advantage is to aggregate several signatures into one, for example, if you receive several entries at a single address, perhaps when it comes to spending, it makes up for using bech32m. Someone correct me if I'm wrong.

Phu Juck

member

Activity: 116

Merit: 76

Quote from: Felicity_Tide on June 26, 2024, 12:11:48 PM

In as much as you want to pass a very helpful information, you should know that cross posting is not accepted.

Here is your cross posting on a local board : https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/my-2-big-reasons-why-we-should-use-segwit-addresses-instead-of-legacy-addresses-5501147

Local boards are exempt from such a rule.

Quote from: Felicity_Tide on June 26, 2024, 12:11:48 PM

Highly ranked members/mod(@achow101) would decide from here.

Yes, let moderators decide.

Topic: My 2 big reasons why we should use SegWit addresses instead of Legacy addresses (Read 390 times)