I am familiar with the concepts of Circles and I understand that personal trust is the base of the social graph. However, that might slow down adoption, as it is very difficult for eg. online services to be paid in CRC.
In lack of a better name wouldn’t a regular Circles account be useful which is “known” by others and implements it’s own trust realization, ie. by verifying Twitter or Github accounts, up to performing a KYC. This Circles account would act as a 3rd party “Trust-Hub”, providing a lot of trust connections which are not originated in personal knowledge of the people, but in a communicated means of identity verification of unknown people (like KYC, Social Networks, proven state identities, etc.).
Depending on the “amount” of trust I want to ensure, I can decide to
- Not support Trust-Hubs at all (this would be the default for real local communities)
- Support only a certain level of trust (ie. facilitated by KYC with video identification)
- Support soft levels of trust (ie. facilitated by verified Twitter or Github accounts)
This could just be another option for realizing a “trust-level” and a compromise between real individual, personal trust and “centralized”, intermediated trust provided by 3rd parties.
What is the opinion of the Circles team on these options?