>So really “Segregated Witness” is about segregated signatures. Why the wacky name with the word “witness” then? I’m not sure… I think Bitcoin people just love

>So really “Segregated Witness” is about segregated signatures. Why the wacky name with the word “witness” then? I’m not sure… I think Bitcoin people just love inventing jargon. Witness is standard term in cryptography, Bitcoin people did not invent it. For instance a signature can be a witness to the fact that you hold a particular private key[0]. >I am also confused about the security properties of the Lightning Network. What happens when one of the hubs gets popped? Can someone steal all of the unsettled transactions? Suddenly this proposed scaling element starts taking on the security properties of Bitcoin exchanges, which are notorious for being popped. If "a hub gets popped" the attacker should be not be able to steal the unsettled transactions. If we were trusting the hubs, like say how we trust coinbase, the LN would be much much easier to design. [0]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Proof_of_knowledge https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Proof_of_knowledge