What is the logic reason behind legacy/segwit wallet address not sending Bitcoin - page 2.

o_e_l_e_o

legendary

Activity: 2268

Merit: 18711

Quote from: tbct_mt2 on July 05, 2023, 09:39:01 AM

Because they don't learn and completely depend on exchanges to receive and send bitcoin. They don't care to learn about Segwit address bech32 and find non custodial wallets support Bech32.

Well, that's not entirely true. While I haven't actively used a legacy address for years, I still have some coins on legacy addresses in the form of old paper wallets or old encrypted cold storage wallets. There is no point moving those coins to a new segwit address just for the sake of it, when they remain perfectly safe and secure where they are.

When I finally come round to spending from those wallets, then I'll obviously direct any change to a segwit address, but in the meantime the coins can stay where they are. I'm sure there are plenty of people in similar situations with coins on old legacy wallets.

BlackHatCoiner

legendary

Activity: 1512

Merit: 7340

Farewell, Leo

I don't think it's laziness. They simply don't care about their clients, and neither do they. Binance is charging much more than an average Legacy transaction, and they still use it. They're like charging 50k sats for Legacy and 20k for Segwit, and I see nobody quitting Binance for that reason. There's absolutely no reason to charge that much, except from the profit they make (which is about 99% of the fee).

Next time there's an empty mempool, and you notice 40 sat/vb for a Legacy transaction, be sure it's one of the prominent centralized exchanges! Tongue

NotATether

legendary

Activity: 1568

Merit: 6660

bitcoincleanup.com / bitmixlist.org

See this page about Segwit transactions for reference: Anatomy of a raw transaction, and BIP141.

The raw transaction format has changed with the addition of a witness data field and some mandatory flag bytes, which is required for constructing a transaction that sends bitcoins to (native) segwit bc1 addresses. And the old ScriptSig fields for native segwit address outputs are cleared, wiped out. Since these exchanges are constructing transactions the old way, they cannot add witness data to transactions making it impossible to send to bc1 addresses.

Nested segwit on the other hand (addresses starting with a 3) have their transaction outputs constructed by creating the witness data AND placing a standard P2SH script and signature in ScriptSig and ScriptPubKey respectively. That's how the old transaction format can still send bitcoins to nested segwit addresses even without witness data because the transaction will still be valid in the old format.

tbct_mt2

hero member

Activity: 2366

Merit: 838

Quote from: SmartCharpa on July 05, 2023, 09:23:24 AM

Why are some exchanges and some platform don't send Bitcoin from legacy to segwit wallet address, is there a cost of operation in implementing that on their exchanges? I don't know why they displayed an error when someone wants to send Bitcoin to an external wallet or send to the Bitcoin wallet address.

They are lazy to upgrade their wallet softwares and only do it when other exchanges, competitors do it. They upgrade when they see risk to lose customers.

Quote

My second question is this, If Segwit is considered to save fees and space, why are people still using the first generational wallet address instead of segwit and also the new improved Taproot wallet address?

Because they don't learn and completely depend on exchanges to receive and send bitcoin. They don't care to learn about Segwit address bech32 and find non custodial wallets support Bech32.

Bech32 adoption https://en.bitcoin.it/wiki/Bech32_adoption

Quote

Why are they not helping the blockchain and the cost of spending Bitcoin.

If they can not help themselves, they can not help others and Bitcoin network, mempools.

Charles-Tim

legendary

Activity: 1512

Merit: 4795

Leading Crypto Sports Betting & Casino Platform

Quote from: SmartCharpa on July 05, 2023, 09:23:24 AM

Why are some exchanges and some platform don't send Bitcoin from legacy to segwit wallet address, is there a cost of operation in implementing that on their exchanges? I don't know why they displayed an error when someone wants to send Bitcoin to an external wallet or send to the Bitcoin wallet address.

Because the exchange or platform do not upgrade their software to support segwit.

Quote from: SmartCharpa on July 05, 2023, 09:23:24 AM

My second question is this, If Segwit is considered to save fees and space, why are people still using the first generational wallet address instead of segwit and also the new improved Taproot wallet address? Why are they not helping the blockchain and the cost of spending Bitcoin.

Because of the question that you just asked and because of the wallet that still do not make segwit their default addresses. But over 95% transactions are segwit transactions.

If there are many exchanges that still support legacy and nested segwit transactions, I think most noncustodial wallets are supporting segwit addresses by now, although not all.

SmartCharpa

sr. member

Activity: 602

Merit: 306

Why are some exchanges and some platform don't send Bitcoin from legacy to segwit wallet address, is there a cost of operation in implementing that on their exchanges? I don't know why they displayed an error when someone wants to send Bitcoin to an external wallet or send to the Bitcoin wallet address.

My second question is this, If Segwit is considered to save fees and space, why are people still using the first generational wallet address instead of segwit and also the new improved Taproot wallet address? Why are they not helping the blockchain and the cost of spending Bitcoin.

Topic: What is the logic reason behind legacy/segwit wallet address not sending Bitcoin - page 2. (Read 321 times)