Hmm,,, looking at the wikipedia entry,

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Freewallet

I don't find any of the developers or business names or locations.

There is an extremely brief entry in Github, almost just a placeholder. This notes that source code for the mobile versions is available via a link, and source code for the PC and MAC versions is not publicly available.

However, there is a person with a Github account,

https://github.com/jdogresorg, who maintains this low activity program set. For what that's worth.

Is there a decent business model behind this wallet? I ask this separate from a discussion of the technical merits of the wallet, many flaws of which were above described.

These are really good discussions. I am going to merit you for each of them, thanks.

I have no idea what you said there. I don't care what people are talking about or what topics are trending.

This is a very simple question. There are hundreds of crypto currency wallets available for the various platforms. In many cases they do not show a clear business model.

The lack of a clear business model creates a curiosity.

Why does this exist? Is there a business model that we don't see? What can it be?

For example, one business model could be to gather (for sale) an information list of people with holdings in crypto.

Is the product for sale You?

Is the product for sale the count of your coins?

Or is it undefined what the product might be, such that after development and deployment of a wallet, the start up can be sold to a third party. And what is his motivation?

You are not sure where I am going with this?

It's a simple question, to show the blockchain transactions.

Otherwise you give value to someone running a click link in an app with zero audit or traceability.

I'm good with your distinction. At the same time, we could say, "It's clear what Coinbase's business model is."

Now let's go back to various wallets.

It's NOT CLEAR with a fair number of them what their business model is.

Here's the test. Do a transaction from your app which incorporates shapeshift/changelly.

Now tell me the transactions which occurred on the blockchains.

Better, just link and put them here for discussion.

1. Yes, apps embed shapeshifter / changelly. This has serious problems, but it is a way to provide a service and keep a small fraction, thus making a profit.

2. This thread is not about "outright scam wallets." Rather it is about the typical wallets that people download and use.

Ah, one correction.

Coinbase keeps a percentage. Their wallet is a straight business deal and (In my opinion) a good one for all parties.

Much of crypto currency was done by dedicated visionaries, often without a goal of personal gain.

This is true of bitcoin. To the benefit of the world.

But what's with all the wallets? There are hundreds of wallets of various sorts, and with the exception of hardware wallets that are bought, they are all free.

What do the developers get? Why are wallets free?

Consider normal, "typical" android and IOS development. People download "free" apps. Then the developers and marketers steal your data and sell it. It's all about your data. And we all know that.

But what model of development are wallet developers following? That of dedicated shareware developers with no profit in mind? That of the current generation of "steal your private data and give you the app for free?"

What am I missing.

LPG/CNG is very clean and nice technology. But most people don't know anything about it, so they mindlessly repeat what they've been told was good.

There's no need to go to extremes to try to get the word "Islam" out of the problem.

Although most people would probably agree on a term such as "radical Islamic extremists."

Mocking could be joking, or it could be insulting.

You'll have to do better than that.

You have a Scripture that says jokes are not allowed?

Here ya' go!

https://thereligionofpeace.com

https://thereligionofpeace.com/attacks/attacks.aspx?Yr=Last30

Now please cease the Takiyya and lying propaganda.

Thank you.

I might get interested in a world gov that did nothing but have secret agents that went out on missions to take care of people and entities that wanted or worked toward world government.

The chain of custody.

You would have to track the transactions down to the current address that contained the bitcoin which had been bought in the past with a fiat transfer that I made. Then you would have to show that current address had other transactions that were linked to me. Preferably both plus and minus.

And today we are urged to not reuse receive addresses. Want to guess why?

Yes this is all correct. RE the bolded above, an example would be if the key I presented was part of a heuristic chain, for which another party had knowledge of.

This reminds me of playing cards, where in normal conditions one assumes that a party other than the dealer cuts the deck, and randomness is established. That's knowing that cutting the deck is insufficient if a talented mechanic is the dealer.

Suppose that I generated a private key, and then allowed the other party to see and to change ten digits of it. He can be certain its then secure from 3rd parties at that moment. I then generate a public key, and show that it contains zero. Then I put this private key in my wallet, move a bitcoin to it.

You mentioned, "The problem then would be that to ensure they don't steal your 1 BTC, you either have to leave them in the sealed room forever, kill them... "

That's kind of funny. "Okay now I've proved I have one bitcoin, but you have to die..." It's like the joke about the spy who says "If you find the secret I'll have to kill you."

But the other party, in the above scenario, does not know the key, only ten digits of it. He cannot find it from just ten digits.

It's impossible to "disprove that you have Bitcoin."

That's an irrefutable hypothesis.

Like...."Disprove that guy walking down the street has a bar of gold."

Cannot be done.

Carrying this a step further, hypothetically, say in a divorce case where it was alleged by one party that the other had one bitcoin.

Wife: He's got two bitcoins! I should get one!

Husband: I have bitcoins? Can you prove that?

I believe that once could sit down with a computer and another person, and demonstrate to his satisfaction that I have a private key that holds one bitcoin, which nobody else has access to.

This would be by creating a new private key in his presence, in some way where he does not see it or all of it.

Then I would show that I was able to move one bitcoin to the public key of that  address.

Then sign a message from that private key and send it.

But if the other party was not in the same room, but was across the internet, then the proof seems far less certain.

I had noticed that when a pre existing private key was in use, there is no recorded history of it's having single or multiple users or "owners." The phrase "no recorded history" is meaningful, because now we must rely on trust.

Hence it appears that any means of proving ownership of a bitcoin must involve  the creation of a new private key.

A wishes to buy something from B with 1 bitcoin, and B asks for proof.

A sits down with B and tries various ways to prove he has coins.

Maybe he logs into Coinbase and shows B the screen.
B raises the objections listed above....

Maybe the answer is something like this.

"Yeah my wife also has access to the account but she also has access to our credit cards and bank accounts. So what? If you had verified those you verified the presence of funds at that instant and you didn't care about multiple people having access to them. Why are you demanding a higher standard here?"

This is an important distinction, but in the context of the question, the problem simply shifts to "Prove you hold keys."

Like, "Dude. If you think I'll drive 50 miles to trade my riding lawnmower for your bitcoins, you gonna have to show me you have them first."