history_of_metamask.md

To whom it may concern,

After taking a hiatus from crypto I began my formal re-entry early last year (early 2021) due to requests for me to be involved in NFT projects. My own opinions on crypto and web3 are somewhat mixed. First, I believe it has opened up a world of innovation that would not exist otherwise. Second, much like ICOs, the propensity for all sorts of scams, fraud, and dishonest behaviour is the norm rather than the exception in this space.

Also I should state that I think of myself as a poet first, a game designer second, an intellectual historian third, and a technical wizard fourth. I have a wide breath of knowledge that often allows me to figure out where market opportunity exists and to be early in things that turn out to have large value (financial or otherwise).

I was often asked during this period about my involvement with Metamask. Now that there are a few articles about this, I can state clearly what is agreed upon and disputed between Consensys and myself. First, all parties appear to agree that I had the idea for a Javascript browser extension wallet, that I assembled the initial team that worked on it, that I wrote the grant that gave the developers the initial capital they needed to develop it, and that “Metamask” was formally created by renaming a GitHub organisation that I started. What is disputed is : how I should refer to myself, whether or not I should be paid back for the expenses I incurred on behalf the project , and whether or not there is any common code or software licenses between the project I got funded and the one that Consensys absorbed.

Personally, I have never referred to myself as the “founder” of this project because in my mind the founder is a person who works on it full time. This was an option at the time of the YCombinator application but I am generally happy about the path that the project took (i.e. Joe Lubin hiring Aaron Davis). That said, it is quite clear to me that I started the project, and I prefer to be referred to as “the artist who created Metamask” or “the founding architect of Metamask.” “Co-founder” may not be technically incorrect but it gives an emphasis that I do not like. Similarly I have never referred to myself as a ‘founder’ of Ethereum. I prefer “founding contributor” or “founding member.”

With respect to the amount I am owed, it was originally only 10% out of the grant that I wrote, and this was, in my mind, a modest amount that was effectively only to reimburse me for my own costs that I had already incurred (which included going to Devcon 0, various sushi dinners for the team, etc). All and all this is not a lot of money but the principle of “fairness” and just recompense does not seem to be shared by any party other than myself, so I will let that be. Of course, like many people of that time I had to pay my expenses by selling cryptocurrency, so the slight seems larger relative to the opportunity cost.

With respect to the common code, there seems to be some slight contradictions in the messages from Consensys staff in the last article on the subject (https://readthegeneralist.com/briefing/metamask). In short, there are three main phases of the project. There is the original phase in which there was no funding. There was the phase from which the funding was received from the Ethereum foundation. There was the phase after the project was absorbed into Consensys. With respect to the code (and other licenses which were in the GitHub repository), it is clear to me that some of the code continued between phase 1 and 2. To what extent the code and license that exists phase 3 is the continuation of phase 2 is not as clear to me. What the main dev seems to be claiming in his response to the journalist is that the code in Phase 1 and Phase 3 are completely different. But “Metamask” by his own admission was created in Phase 2 approximately around the time the funds were received from the Ethereum Foundation. So in that sense, it is misleading to claim that the code in Metamask (i.e. at the time of renaming) is completely different from that in Vapor (Phase 1), because it was exactly the same code in exactly the same GitHub repository, only the name had changed. In short, figuring out what if anything is the same from Phase 1 to Phase 3 (besides possibly removing annoying software licenses) is a tricky issue that could only be resolved by going through the source code itself. For better or worse, I lost access to this long ago and any claims made since then by Consensys employees have not been accompanied by evidence backing up those claims.

In general, the ability to tell a historically accurate tale of the origins of this project has generally not been helped by Consensys, which has mostly ignored my requests for clarification (including specifics requests regarding shared terminology prior to any interviews) , did not provide information requested by journalists on the dates or terms of their acquisition of the project, and are withholding the more minute details of what source code was changed when. To my knowledge the only public statement of Consensys is in a podcast Joe Lubin states that I helped start it but doesn’t believe I should refer to myself as a co-founder . (https://podcasts.apple.com/fi/podcast/uponly-with-cobie-ledger/id1554387610?i=1000544495279, 19min). As already stated I agree with Joe and, despite my reservations above about dishonest people in crypto, don’t have particularly bad feelings about Consensys as an organisation.

In short, at the time “Metamask” was created, it was simply the renamed GitHub organisation of a project I had created. I don’t go out of my way to talk about it because, like many things web3, it still seems at a fairly clunky stage of the technology and I am waiting for products that reach hundreds of millions of users and do so without moral hazard. I also find it a matter of poignant irony that when people ask about Metamask they some how expect me to be a crypto billionare, when rather the reverse is the case, I am an artist who lost money on financing early Ethereum projects and am probably cash flow negative related to what I would have made in other industries.

If you want to find out more about things I’m really passionate about about ask me about my oracle deck, my cat poems, or my metalanguage for generating metaverses.

Best,

Joel Dietz

==== What follows is my version controlled reconstruction of the history of Metamask based on available facts as they have been released by the media ==

0. Joel co-founds Ethereum meetups in Silicon Valley and Ethercasts youtube channel (https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCruzgbuOs-7X9BINIGPAsrQ). Kumavis presents his atari-themed ethereum browser / serpent interpreter at one early meetup.

1. Joel goes to Devcon 0 in Berlin. Multiple people mention need for Javascript light wallet. Talks with Vitalik and Gav in office. They like idea. Vitalik gives name “Vapor” and said that Eth Grants would interested in funding.

2. Joel goes back to Silicon Valley. Converses with Martin Becze (https://github.com/wanderer) about project who is doing JS coding for the Ethereum Foundation. Starts writing project proposal. Recruits Kumavis who had already built a Javascript simulator . Kumavis said he would need funding to quit his job. Joel is currently also running bitcoin based crowdfunding platform at this time (Swarm) which is doing low volume, but project is listed there.

3. Joel, Martin and Kumavis apply to YCombinator and get interview (https://youtu.be/p135D4Tv1mM). YCombinator states they aren’t sure about the utility of such a product and don’t give funding with the comment, "Unfortunately, we've decided not to fund Vapor. We were impressed by the three of you and the demo we saw, but we weren't convinced that this would grow large among mainstream users.... We'd be happy to hear from you again if you figure out a clearer plan to get widespread adoption of smart contracts."

4. Kumavis begins serious work on building light client. Says his teammates at Apple might also be willing to leave apple to work on it. Joel and Martin finish the application to Eth grants (https://123mastery.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/10/VAPOR-Bursury-Application.docx), including a small carve out for design and reimbursements for Joel for costs he has incurred so far.

5. Joel is in frequent communication with Wendell Davis of the Ethereum Foundation who is managing the program and gives indication that the grant has been awarded.

6. ____ ? (There is now a well researched article that covers this period that includes input from Kumavis: https://www.readthegeneralist.com/briefing/metamask)

7. Joel awakes to find the channels renamed and the GitHub organization renamed and himself removed from the GitHub organisation. Licenses indicating shared ownership of the project appear to also be removed.

8. Joel later finds out the new name of the project “Metamask” is now a Consensys project.

9. Joel writes emails to people from Consensys to find out what happened but no one responds (Dec 27, 2015, Sep 8, 2016).

Some people also ask about the history of the fox. Basically Kumavis and myself (but esp. Kumavis) were Starfox fans and we thought it would be a cool 3d logo (I will note that there is a deeper history to the original choice of logo but if you want to know you should find some dream researchers in Toronto and see if they will tell you).