Segwit Adoption. I looked at some data, and we are not there yet. - page 4.

LoyceV

legendary

Activity: 3290

Merit: 16489

Thick-Skinned Gang Leader and Golden Feather 2021

Quote from: bitmover on October 19, 2020, 12:52:09 PM

Quote from: jackg on October 19, 2020, 12:38:20 PM

Can you do one with only addresses that have been received over the past year?

I think this could be interesting as well. Probably a pie chart of all UTXO by address format since 2017 when the first segwit wallets were released.

I can't do with the data I used, but it is certainly easy to find. I think loycev made this data available in csv format here https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/m.54373224

I think you're looking for this data. It's 112 GB (at 100 kB/s), and gives each address per block. That should be enough to create a graph with the number of addresses per type per day.
I still have the data, so I can extract some of it for you or give you a faster download, but it's still going to be a lot of data.

Note that the green addresses in your pie chart also include multisig.

fiulpro

hero member

Activity: 1890

Merit: 831

Quote from: bitmover on October 19, 2020, 01:57:42 PM

Quote from: fiulpro on October 19, 2020, 01:38:46 PM

See not all people support SegWit , there are countless articles on the internet stating how it's a super bad thing and is destroying the system itself. I will quote one below :

Quote

“Segregated witness is systematically destroying everything good and worthwhile about Bitcoin: segwit is inelegant and complicated; it creates two parallel sets of rules for evaluating transactions, but ignores one of them. Segwit breaks Bitcoin’s security by empowering miners and anyone who can coerce them to steal balances. And segwit is breaking the Bitcoin ecosystem up, causing people to fork the blockchain just to avoid using it, and destroying the mind share, confidence, and name recognition in Bitcoin.”

-snip-

Well apparently I don't know much about this guy but he seems to have a lot of problems with segWit , but being a software developer he should understand for a fact that , these things needs to adapt, if the transaction fee of bitcoins doesn't have a solution soon , it will have problems for the people for sure. People will opt for other solutions.

This is a 3 year old article.

By that time, bitcoin was forking into bitcoin and bch.
There was a lot of misinformation around the web to promote BCH fork. There was also a lot of uncertainty about bitcoin future, segwit, blocksize and so on. This article was one of those that promoted misinformation. Nobody would ever publish an article like that today.

If you look back 3 years ago, all bch drama and discussion about blocksize/segwit may look ridiculous. But there were a lot of early bitcoin holders and adopters who were mislead into by buying BCH.

Yes, but I have seen some people who still insists on using normal addresses, but at the same time samourai wallet is like the most secure , most private one that I ever used , it was suggested by someone on this forum years back and I still use it till now.

Even though the article is like 3 years old but it still appears on the front page , no one even thought about updating it , nor there was any additional information and such.

I believe the only disadvantage of segWit is :
It's limits your choices since most wallets don't support it.

°~°

I believe with time those people for sure exchanged their coins in BTC now.

The problem is , if a newbie , if a non tech person , who just joined searches on google , this is what he will get , which unfortunately is misleading as you said it , that is why I said I would leave this discussion for tech experts.

-maybe someone should start making blog ? Share opinions and stuff there ? Since there are many limited positive articles regarding it. Which might influence the usage too.

bitmover

legendary

Activity: 2352

Merit: 6089

bitcoindata.science

Quote from: fiulpro on October 19, 2020, 01:38:46 PM

See not all people support SegWit , there are countless articles on the internet stating how it's a super bad thing and is destroying the system itself. I will quote one below :

Quote

“Segregated witness is systematically destroying everything good and worthwhile about Bitcoin: segwit is inelegant and complicated; it creates two parallel sets of rules for evaluating transactions, but ignores one of them. Segwit breaks Bitcoin’s security by empowering miners and anyone who can coerce them to steal balances. And segwit is breaking the Bitcoin ecosystem up, causing people to fork the blockchain just to avoid using it, and destroying the mind share, confidence, and name recognition in Bitcoin.”

-snip-

Well apparently I don't know much about this guy but he seems to have a lot of problems with segWit , but being a software developer he should understand for a fact that , these things needs to adapt, if the transaction fee of bitcoins doesn't have a solution soon , it will have problems for the people for sure. People will opt for other solutions.

This is a 3 year old article.

By that time, bitcoin was forking into bitcoin and bch.
There was a lot of misinformation around the web to promote BCH fork. There was also a lot of uncertainty about bitcoin future, segwit, blocksize and so on. This article was one of those that promoted misinformation. Nobody would ever publish an article like that today.

If you look back 3 years ago, all bch drama and discussion about blocksize/segwit may look ridiculous. But there were a lot of early bitcoin holders and adopters who were mislead into by buying BCH.

fiulpro

hero member

Activity: 1890

Merit: 831

See not all people support SegWit , there are countless articles on the internet stating how it's a super bad thing and is destroying the system itself. I will quote one below :

Quote

“Segregated witness is systematically destroying everything good and worthwhile about Bitcoin: segwit is inelegant and complicated; it creates two parallel sets of rules for evaluating transactions, but ignores one of them. Segwit breaks Bitcoin’s security by empowering miners and anyone who can coerce them to steal balances. And segwit is breaking the Bitcoin ecosystem up, causing people to fork the blockchain just to avoid using it, and destroying the mind share, confidence, and name recognition in Bitcoin.”

You can read more at : https://steemit.com/bitcoin/@bitcoinshirtz/the-hard-truth-about-segwit

This statement is made by a guy Nathan :

Well apparently I don't know much about this guy but he seems to have a lot of problems with segWit , but being a software developer he should understand for a fact that , these things needs to adapt, if the transaction fee of bitcoins doesn't have a solution soon , it will have problems for the people for sure. People will opt for other solutions.

As for me I do use SegWit to send/recieve but there are many wallets and exchanges who doesn't support it therefore that's a downside and limits my options.

I believe we do have a serious matter of discussion here, the advantages and disadvantages of segWit. Since am not a professional nor qualified to even answer this , I would leave it for the fellow techno experts.

BrewMaster

legendary

Activity: 2128

Merit: 1293

There is trouble abrewing

i don't think looking at addresses is going to give us the best metric here because an address may have been created any time. for instance i have a funded address that is from before SegWit and i have never touched it because there is no reson to, but that doesn't mean i haven't been using SegWit for all my transactions.

the best metric in my opinion is the number of SegWit inputs per block. for example if a block has 2000 transactions and that is 2500 inputs and out of those 1500 are SegWit inputs then you can say the adoption is 60%.

bitmover

legendary

Activity: 2352

Merit: 6089

bitcoindata.science

Quote from: jackg on October 19, 2020, 12:38:20 PM

Can you do one with only addresses that have been received over the past year?

I think this could be interesting as well. Probably a pie chart of all UTXO by address format since 2017 when the first segwit wallets were released.

I can't do with the data I used, but it is certainly easy to find. I think loycev made this data available in csv format here https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/m.54373224

I just need to dig into it.

Quote from: Artemis3 on October 19, 2020, 12:45:16 PM

There is no reason to use legacy. I have been using bech32 nearly since it got added into Electrum. The incentive is there, you pay a tiny little bit less in transaction fees. Could this be some exchange that keep being the bulk users still with outdated systems in place? Maybe the pools as well?

The only real reason to use Legacy is to be able to sign a message which signature is recognized by every software. Other than that, just disadvantages, as you pointed out.

Artemis3

legendary

Activity: 2030

Merit: 1573

CLEAN non GPL infringing code made in Rust lang

There is no reason to use legacy. I have been using bech32 nearly since it got added into Electrum. The incentive is there, you pay a tiny little bit less in transaction fees. Could this be some exchange that keep being the bulk users still with outdated systems in place? Maybe the pools as well?

Well usage is voluntary, same as LN; but personally i see no reason to keep using legacy or P2SH addresses. And yes, P2SH pays a bit more than bech32, so don't use the excuse that its "the same thing" and move everything into bech32. You will appreciate it the next time you move funds from a bech32 address, its cool and it works.

Quote from: https://github.com/bitcoin/bips/blob/master/bip-0173.mediawiki

Motivation

For most of its history, Bitcoin has relied on base58 addresses with a truncated double-SHA256 checksum. They were part of the original software and their scope was extended in BIP13 for Pay-to-script-hash (P2SH). However, both the character set and the checksum algorithm have limitations:

Base58 needs a lot of space in QR codes, as it cannot use the alphanumeric mode.
The mixed case in base58 makes it inconvenient to reliably write down, type on mobile keyboards, or read out loud.
The double SHA256 checksum is slow and has no error-detection guarantees.
Most of the research on error-detecting codes only applies to character-set sizes that are a prime power, which 58 is not.
Base58 decoding is complicated and relatively slow.

jackg

copper member

Activity: 2856

Merit: 3071

https://bit.ly/387FXHi lightning theory

Can you do one with only addresses that have been received over the past year?

Some people probably haven't bothered updating and a few might not even know about it... For both bitcoin core and electrum you have to make a new wallet and it took me about a year to do that myself so.... I think Hardware wallets have also taken a longer amount of time to update them to use segwit (although trezor's Web client does suggest you update from legacy).

bitmover

legendary

Activity: 2352

Merit: 6089

bitcoindata.science

I saw a nice topic today about services that support segwit, by dkbit98.

I saw a question about adoption, and I decided to investigate further into:

Quote from: bitmover on October 19, 2020, 07:15:14 AM

Quote from: pooya87 on October 18, 2020, 11:36:59 PM

Quote

Native Segwit adoption is on the rise

i'm curious if there is any data to support this, i thought it plateaued a while ago.

I made a quick google search and found something herE:
https://transactionfee.info/charts/payments-spending-segwit/

That chart really looks optimist, but is there really all that 60%+ adoption?

I looked today at LoyceV tsv file with all addresses with balance, and I made these 2 charts.

The first one is the sum of all balances by address format. We can clearly see that Legacy address holds more than 63% of all balance available.

If you sum all the balance you can see that every bitcoin in included in the graphic, 18.525 million btc

Someone could argue: "But those old addresses are mostly old and abandoned, many whale wallets lost, abandoned, etc"

So I decided to make a second chart: Number of addresses by format.

The situation is even worse...

So, we can conclude that we are having more segwit transactions now than before. But most of the bitcoins are still in legacy addresses.

There is a lot of potential uses in that TSV files LoyceV made. I will try to make better analysis or charts later on.

Edit:
Found a better way to calculate segwit adoption using transaction_count.txt and witness_count.txt in Bitcoin block data available in CSV format (LoyceV/blockchair data)

Topic: Segwit Adoption. I looked at some data, and we are not there yet. - page 4. (Read 1284 times)