ABOUT THIS EPISODE
Sarah Friend is one of two developers working on Circles UBI. Circles is a
basic income project that seeks to build local economic communities.
Links: Sarah Friend
The Hashing It Out Social Media
Episode 97 · 1 year ago
SHARE THIS EPISODE
Episode 97 · 1 year ago
Hashing It Out # 97- CirclesUBI- Sarah Friend
ABOUT THIS EPISODE
Sarah Friend is one of two developers working on Circles UBI. Circles is a
basic income project that seeks to build local economic communities.
Links: Sarah Friend
The Hashing It Out Social Media
Hey, what's up? So Avalanche, let's talk about it. What's an avalanche? Snow comes down real fast, fierce gains momentum. But I'm not talking about the natural disaster. Or if it's not a really disaster, I guess it no one's around. But anyways, avalanche. What is it? You've heard about it, not, you're gonna hear some more. It's an open source platform for launching decentralized finance applications. Right, defy. That's what you want. Developers who build on avalance can easily create powerful, reliable, secure applications and custom blockchain networks with complex rule sets, or build an existing private or public subnet right. I think what you should do right now is stop what you're doing, even if it's listening to this podcast. Stop, pull over, go to the gas station. If you need to go to a subway, there's a subway, like everywhere. There's always a subway, all right, all right, there's always a kroger. Just stopping a parking lot somewhere. Go to Alva LAV, Alva labs dot org, to learn more. All right, stop, go to Alva lab. That's a va labs labs dot org. Now entering forecast work. Welcome to hashing it out, a podcast where we talked to the tech innovators behind blockchain infrastructure and decentralized networks. We dive into the weeds to get at why and how people build this technology the problems they face along the way. Come listen and learn from the best in the business so you can join our ranks. Welcome back to hashing everybody. I'm your coes for today John Martlin, with also co host Jay Harrold. Say Hi everybody. J Hi Everyone. It's a lovely morning and we have with us today Sarah, friend from the circle's UBI project. Say HIVERYWAYS are Hi'm a buddy. Thanks. Yeah, so get to have you here. So why don't we start with the standard bio question? Did you get into bit crypto and what are you doing here? Yeah, for sure. So I'm here to talk to you today because I am one of two developers, yes, only to somehow a project called Circle Tbi that launched on October sixteen and too much more attention than be expected, happily, but I'll so with a fair bit of suffering on our parts. Yeah, I got into Crypto two thousand and sixteen. I used to work with John Actually in transparency at consensus for a couple years. It's true. We did a talk together that we did and I we did and it was it was a really good talk, I think, or like I learned a ton putting it together. Like I'll never forget what happened to Rhythm D. Yeah, maybe we'll think only to this, to the like, when recordings of the slides in the show notes. So yeah, why don't you tell us what circles you buy? Ubi Is? Yeah, for sure. So circles is a alternative version of what a universal basic income could look like. So normally when people say universal basic income they mean the state redistributing Fiat money, but circles is more like an alternative currency. So it has more in common with historical alternative currencies like the Brixton pound or if the good dollars. But it is an alternative currency that contains wealth re distribution inside its mechanisms. Or maybe a better way to put that is it d incentivizes hoarding. So yeah, it's a it's a community he community currency project that is built on right now, the XTI blockchain. So I think we should probably get into the XTI blockchain. At some point too, but maybe you can just say so. It's a community currency. How does it? How does it work? Yeah, well, I've explained circle so many times the last two weeks that I'm just like, what comes next? You know, my brain is scrambling around, but it is. So everyone assigns up for circles actually gets their own token,...
...which is a standard arc twenty token, as y'all probably familiar with, and they're also entered into a trust graph of all of the other circles users. So we when you said their own token. It's like a personal token, right, it is. Yeah, okay, it's their own token contract, it's can it stays contained an attached to their identity even as it flows through the system. So, yeah, the the sort of personal tokens have been a bit of a like fat or mean lately. Like circles is a network of personal tokens. Okay, it makes sense. Yeah, and on these, I'm sorry, aren't these network tokens in the in this trust network, then interoperable? Yep, exactly. When when you're in a trustrework wet, you are embedded in a trust network, but when you trust someone, what you're like really doing materially is committing to exchange their token, the person you're trusting, at a one to one rate with your own token, and this is kind of how we do the civil defense for circles. It's easy to make an account, but the idea or argument is that it's much harder to get actual other people who have real things to exchange to trust your account. So that's what so this commitment is signifying that you're an individual. I believe so, for example, a give if I have a friend Alice, and I Trust Alice, I will accept her token, but if she creates another account, I will probably not be willing to trust that account and presumably also less willing to trust her riginal account. I would, I would, I would suggest on trusting Alice in that situation, because it means that alice is collecting to two basic incomes. The argument is that it's actually quite difficult to maintain sort of parallel identities over a duration of time and there are is research about the threshold at which it's like almost impossible to maintain, though I can't cite it. So yeah, this is a it kind of like it's a bit like an immune system. You might imagine of like these fake accounts. We find them out and then we start sort of walling them off and they end up being there a little pocket of the network that's all fake accounts. And and by the way, there is already one. It's kind of funny, like people have definitely written bots against circles. They've done it within the first like week and a half and, yeah, stampoles samples of accounts. So it's like a little I mean like if you picture, because this is a graph essentially, right, so there's almost like a fork of or not even a fork. I guess it's an isolated graph, but as long as I'm not trusting it, that's not a problem for me in using circles. Yeah, so saftly it's a form of reputation networks in a way then. So if you're operating same multiple accounts, whether maliciously or not, ultimately the one that you're most public with, your public trust graph, I guess, which is really between people, two people, is incorporated into that that one profile. Yeah, yeah, OK, so we're the trust graph is all on chain and it is all public. Okay, so right, that's a good point. So you are, I mean with any typical blockchain, like all this is publicly visible, including your relationships and who you trust. Yeah, exactly. If you don't trust your friends back, not only do they know, but the world knows. But I think this is something that blocked. Like people on the blockchain community are very familiar with that. Their transactions are visible on the blockchain, though maybe it's not as understood as as clearly as it could be in all quarters, but it's definitely something that is unfamiliar when you're talking with non cryptomative folks. So I like to try to make it clear. Yeah, okay, yeah, so so what under what circumstances, or what are the factors that someone should take into account when deciding whether or not to trust someone? There being a lot of people posting their links on twitter, pinging people directly, saying Hey, can you trust me? What do you need to to to consider and what are the implications of...
...extending your trust to someone in circles? Yeah, the the Heuristic, we say, is if you know someone in real life, and I don't necessarily mean in person, because I think that real life can be online as well, but if you if you know someone, my personal heroistic has been like if I would accept a lun should meet with you, I will trust you, which is actually very wide criteria, but I think probably everyone has their own. Martin Copeleman, thunder initiator of the circle's project, still really active with it, likes to say it's would you pay someone's universal basic income? So, because you're accepting the tokens of the people you trusted one to one ratio, you could frame it as you know, you're sort of paying them or floating their their tokens sung ability, with your own. So what is what's a human language? Way? If they if I so, if I trust someone, am I making assumptions about their like that the trust that they're willing to extend to other people, or perhaps like their, you know, ability to to discern who's trustworthy as well. Let's see, it's if someone had if you trust someone who has no other trust connections. Tokens are spent transitively. It's pretty important concept for the circle's system. So say I trust Alice and Alice Trust Bob, but I've never met Bob. Bob Doesn't trust me, I don't trust him, but Bob Wants to buy my sofa. Bob Can send his coins to Alice and Alice can send her coins to me so we can pass them through the trust network and went. So if we did that, BOB would effectively pay me for the SOFA, but he do it through Alice and that would mean that every person in the path of that transaction only ends up with tokens that they trust. So from that, if I trust someone and nobody trust them and I accept their tokens, I might have a hard time spending them because I can't pass them on from any future trust pass. So you do sort of want to think about you want to, I think strategically, I would aim to trust people who you foresee being active, both in building a trust graph and in using circles, but especially in the early days. You know, it's very difficult to predict that. I've been I've been trusting people just who I want to see join and I hope will be excited about it. Yeah, absolutely, but it dies. You can't like get hurt necessarily like like like, if someone has trusted someone else is trusted, a fake account that you trust, you're not going to end up with those fake coins. Right. It could be that if this person maybe is bad at discerning who they should or should not trust, then their own tokens will become somewhat less trusted because they're ending up with money that's not with other people's money that's not worthwhile or work or valuable. But generally it's not a huge risk. It sounds like it's like a one hook risk really, so one hok risk another pops out is less less concerning. Yeah, there was. There was some debate. I saw, you know. That's so Damn Finley for MED and mask was arguing for a very high bar. Neuron from the Pan valid project was saying maybe in the future you should be really careful. But, and I think I like this argument, just it's just getting off the ground. Circles, we had nobody as any idea with circles are worth right now. Why not just like? I'd rather just see the network flourish and just trust whoever and and you can prune that back if circles become really valuable and you want to be more careful about it in the future, but let's boot strap it for the time being. Yeah, that's it's kind of interesting debate and I really like neurons point too, because it kind of takes into account the monetary system and of circles, which is minting coins to every every every token mince itself as a function of time, and the rate of which is minted actually inflates annually. So the amount that...
...you can have stolen from you is like less now than it ever will be. It's really quite low if you take a long term view of the circle's monetary system. Yeah, great, Jay, I guess you know jumping off on that point. What ECO economic model do you consider the circle's UPI to fall under? Are there any sort of parallels that people kind of can draw from? HMM, the closest project to circles the closest. So I'm not expert on on monetary systems or MONTERY theory. First off, disclaimer. The closest parallel system that's functional is called UNITOR. It's based in France. It's also a blockchain project and it has very, very similar parameters, so it's issue to every account that's sort of within a strong set. It also uses a web of trust for identifying accounts and it is also inflating every year. Another example that I think is maybe related is called the miracle of warble colloquially. So it's a project or an out sort of currency that existed in, I think, Germany or Austria during the Great Depression, and it was a demoage currency. So currency that was issued today had its value had, say next week. And it's interesting and interesting sort of historical moment because the town that implemented this town currency experienced fewer economic hardships during the depression. So those are those are two like fairly similar ones, but they're both a bit small. I can't think of an example at a state level that has has happened. I would say circles borrows from more from the world of modern monetary theory than sort of commodity money or, you know money monetary systems which are tied to a specific resource. Yeah, I mean in in the case of modern monetary theory. I mean not assuming that you're an expert on economic models. Do you feel this? This nicely fits in with that, because I feel that a lot of different people have different perspectives on what that would look like. Personally, I don't know that current Keynesian thinking really bodes well for MMT, just because there isn't an incentive to drive up of wages. HMM. I I think that you are more experienced in the world of monetary theory than me based on the question. The reason I pulled in the reference of modern monetary theory is my understanding that it doesn't hold that money and the quantity of money being printed or issued has to be tied to some our art of outstart are outside limited resource in circles. Actually, you could argue that it is. It's tied to identities and it's tied to human time, but it's not tied to GDP or, you know, gold or a resource that way. Yeah, does that? Does that add the clarification in terms of what circles will do? Two wages to speak to that? I have no idea in the world of I see circles as an experiment. It's a monetary system that is, as far as I know, quite unique and it deserves to get tried. We deserve as a civilization, to collect some data about it this. So I think of like the history of universal basic income pilots. There and and in the universal basic income community there's a ton of to speak about.
What will happen to wages. I think actually there's a good chance that they might go down. If you can imagine maybe if everyone is receiving a basic income, they might not be motivated to take jobs. But also, in order to provide benefit, jobs might not need to pay as much per hour. So I think it's it's not. It's not clear to me. I will be very curious and I think that it's not. Circles rolling out to enough people where we can really answer a question like that is also, you know, speculative. That's fair. I mean I think you know a bunch of things that maybe fall into what could be an mt net is good. And yet decoupling, I mean I think part of the problem is GDP is so tied with with people's own earnings and their ability to churn, and thus wage stagnation is just natural. It sounds like this. More D couples from wage in a way that it's more based on individual participation and ultimate growth of these network graphs also then tie to overall I guess, the parallel being GDP in this case. Yeah, it's tied to embeddedness within communities. I think just you know, maybe this is not maybe a normal monetary conversation reference, but sometimes I also explain circles as being an attempt to scale up a premodern gift economy actually. So you know, I receive, by virtue of my embeddedness in a community, my the that people know me as an individual. But we now live in such large communities where it's you can't manage that and one human brain. So in some ways I feel like that that might be the most analogous historical example. I think maybe one way of Putty is just to me it feels like it's it's monetizing trust and the the ties between people, and so there's a night. A Nice Story to tell is that it incentivizes people to trust each or to identify people they can trust more and and develop relationships that that they that they can put stock in and to value the currency that tries to tie them together. Yes, no, yeah, definitely. And you know, we talked a lot about in circles team like types of labor that aren't wealth seen in our current economic system, and I think definitely like the work of maintaining social ties is one of them. It's so, so important, this work of caring for others, but it's only in some cases monetizable and sometimes invisible. So that's something that we're curious about. I think it also maybe they're saying, when we talk about circles and the sort of broader economy it might exist within like a state, that I don't know if I see circles likely to be the only monetary system in any place. I think that it maybe will serve best. Is a pet theory because of course in practice none of this has happened, but I think I see it working best is sort of an alternative or a coexisting with the Fiat currencies were all more familiar with and the other cryptocurrencies. HMM, complimentary. So I didn't city of monetary systems. Yes, yeah, that makes sense. It's seems like a more resilient approach than then a monoculture of currencies. Why don't you tell us about the launch a little bit and how it's gone so far? I think it's maybe been two weeks since started hearing about it on twitter. Yeah, coming up just over two weeks. Well, it was crazy within and I want kind of apologies to anyone hearing this who was unable to use circles for some period of time. Within like six or seven hours, it was our servers were totally down and we had we had launched...
...on like a geothermally powered server in Iceland, which has like no tools for scaling whatsoever. So we, you know, we're really had to. We had to set up a new and bigger or server like manually from top to bottom, and I think we like we managed to as fast as we can, but we're actually still working on like a proper transition that we envission to an environment that can scale as it needs to with demand. So we're still dealing with the just from time to time. It was, it was. What do I keep saying to people? I keep saying I'm sure will be really happy about the launch. Bunch of stopped being stressed out by it. So what does that look like in terms of like user activity? And Yeah, pulled it up just just as we got on, before we started recording, and we have just over US sixty two thousand five hundred deployed accounts. Wow, so I'm a presumably many more who are still waiting to successfully deploy. For those supermer of sign up for circles you through our interface. You need three tress connections before you can enter the system. If you are inclined to interact with this more contracts directly, you can, of course sign up immediately. So there's there's probably some pool of people still waiting to be verified through the UI. So yeah, that's that's that's the current state of it. Probably about Tenzero of those where even in the first forty eight hours. Luckily, growth has tapered off and we all now sleep through the night. That's nice. Yeah, it feels to me like I think I was so excited about because it felt really refreshing. I mean, I my sense is that there was some of the momentum was like people recognizing another kind of like almost like a yield farming opportunity and the sense of that if you get in earlier, you'll start printing your own tokens a bit earlier. This doesn't really make that much of a difference, though, does it? Like like what, when I join and I start trusting people and trusting other people, how many sort of how many tokens am I getting and how is the minting function? Yeah, so everyone right now is getting eight per day, about a two hundred and forty per month, and so it at eight per day. The advantage of getting it early is very small, but the community of people from crypto twitter, for example, are familiar with very different get in early mechanics and I think that spurred part of it. It's like waiting a couple days with the surfers to come back up. Is Really not, you know, a barrier. And even still, I think there's another misunderstanding, has been that circles is a speculative asset, because I really suspect it never will be, because it's tied to individual identities. So there's no point in the purchasing circles without knowing whose circles I'm purchasing. But I think that's a lot of misunderstanding. So it's both speculative and inflation happens, sort of accelerates later, kind of thing. Yeah, inflation is happening at seven percent per year and it's compounding. So you said eight per day. Does that? Does that change or is that consistent forever? It'll change. Next year it'll be eight times one point zero seven. Okay, yeah, and and then the next year that will compound again. So so yeah, it's sounds it's really a system where the circles you get now will be dwarfed by the circles you are getting at a later date. And the the the that that mechanism has, the property that I've kind of talked about when I said it de disincentivizes boarding and it does something likely distributing wealth in a way. So you can imagine, you know, to use totally fake numbers. If you sign up today, John, and the circles are issued at five, five a day. So you know, the day goes by, you have five circles and say there's a hundred percent inflation every day, just to make it really obvious.
So I sign up the next day. So you have five and I have zero, but another day goes by and it inflates, so you get ten, you have fifteen and I have ten, and then you know, it's just continues. At first, though, the difference between our accounts will stay at five. The relative difference between how much you have and how much I have is going to go down over time, the longer we stay in the system. So that's the the, the the the universal basic income, the most universal basic can come like property of circles, and it's really it's the opposite of get in early. Is pays off. Yeah, fun fact circles has been a fake circles token has been listed on you to swap with selling at eighty dollars. Hopefully not to too many people. So that's the extent of the like like fervor that doesn't really understand circles. Yeah, it'd be interesting to see what the volume is on the Oh we posted. We posted like please don't buy it. I hope people saw. Yeah, so, so this is all running on on x die. It'd be really may be great to hear about like how you chose x, what what Xi is for people and and also why you chose that chain, or layer two to for your project. Yeah, for sure. So, yeah, x day is a etherium side chain that uses die Xti as its native token. It also has this really nice property. It's POAA, mind, proof of authority mind, and the people who are doing the mining have agreed to keep the gas prices at one goy. Who knows? This is, of course, a human agreement. It might fall apart, but for now they are and we was really important for circles to be accessible to non crypto native users, and for us one of the requirements was there for that was that we relay transactions. So we are paying people's transactions these and it would be nice to launch on mainet etherium, but given what's happened with gas, keyes, especially over the last year. We don't think it's financially sustainable for our team. It's the biggest reason we're on x die of the various side chains and lear too slowly. The infrastructure for Exti seemed pretty stable. You know, public nodes, the graph is compatible with it. Bunch of you know block. It doesn't block as well. All of the things were sort of in place to use it, whereas some of the other side chains that be considered were a lot earlier and we weren't as sure about how the support would be. And this being good Jate, I'll just record the overtalk at that point. Sorry. So you mentioned UX being a little bit easier for, I guess, non crypto enthusiasts. I like when people consider that design in mind. So I imagine it's less dependent on, say, a wallet first and then it's sort of a kind of a walled out. I'm not sure I understand the in terms of in terms of the UX of it. Is it you need to make sure that you have a metamask installed first, or is it something that it's inheriting the Ux and then when you're looking, when you're ready to leave the system, then it provides a way to do that exactly. Think it's exactly. I think it's you're describing. There's no Meta mask, there's no wallet. It uses what is this is kind of it's one of the interesting things about the the UX choices that circles made is that actually, people who are deeply integrated into cryptocommunities often don't like it because to them it feels really insecure and unsafe. So, yeah, it uses a fairly disposable burner key and that key is an owner of the notice is safe. So if someone, as someone might become more cryptnative, they can add a p created otherwise to be an owner. If they're safe. I think I actually might be already compatible. But the SAFE UI is compatible the circles so that...
I can that is alternative, an alternate way to interact. But are APP you know you don't. It doesn't even tell you you're using a blockchain. Honestly, you don't see an address anywhere except in your profile link. And Yeah, all of these things are very pushed, pushed away. I think for most users that's the better way to go, to be honest. For a lot of especially for a lot of users. Yeah, a lot of video games use that. I think it makes it easier for people. So I guess if it's more if there's sort of less, you wax barriers for people than how does it avoid the how does a user avoid the social dilemma of the so called Myspace top eight? I have all the people I trust, but people still want to connect the people I connect do not think I trust them enough. I may not have enough of their tokens yet. And going from there. Yeah, well, this is then a hotly debated subject in this team. Actually like what we visualize and how, because it is all public and this is an exposed in the Ui right now. But Trust is weighted, so you know if you don't trust someone back. Is it visualized? Is it you know? Will someone make a viewer someday where we get all see everybody's follower accounts on circles? I don't really know. But we've taken the strategy of not making it super visible. You can see who trusts you and who trust you back. The weights are well of upcoming feature. But yeah, so, so right now, when you log in you do see a list of people who are in your immediate trusts are but it's not the people who's tokens you hold most or the people you trust the most. It's just the people who you've interacted with most recently. Yeah, but but whether the I think I'd be impossible for those, those tough questions to not come into play at some point. They were there. We're already so familiar with them, with social media. So so, just so I understand, is that is just like almost like the negative side being popular that we're talking about, where I just I feel pressure to to accept everybody's request to trust them and sort of yet not feeling comfortable turning them down. I think that's part of it and I think there's this is like a known sort of issue with web of trust primitives and the the PDP protocol. If you're like fully following the key signing protocol, I think you're supposed to collect all the proofs and then go home and do the trusting so that no one you're not like confronting anyone when you're refusing to trust them. You could just like ghost basically. So with circles, maybe these things will have to come up at some point. They're not unfamiliar questions, though. Like you know, I got follow by someone I worked with in high school, but I didn't follow them back. I'm familiar with navigating that guilt, as I'm sure most are. So in a way it sort of disincentivizes trying to get so many friends, whereas traditional social media does the opposite, for reasons we are all well too familiar with. Yeah, I would say that definitely trust in circles is a riskier operation than what we're familiar with, from what we've been trained in, really from social media use. That's interesting because I almost see that as a downward pressure on overall potential supply, which is a good thing. So kind of limits over supply because it it dilutes your did it died, it delight, dilutes your tokens. Essentially, you can definitely end up with a system where you have tokens that are expendable because the amount of people who trust you is fewer than the supply of Tokens that you have. So, yeah,...
...exactly possible. Yeah, it's a it's also one of the things that I would really like to see. The way to trust get surfaced in the Ui because, especially in these early days of circles, there is it'd be really nice to be able to help people join by giving them a lower rate. I'm not sure we've talked at weighted trust yet. Maybe we have and I missed it, but I think we didn't. You and I DM each other about it, okay, but it's so we've transitive transactions. You can imagine that they're the people all in the middle of the transitive chain are aware that they're going on. So you could wake up one night and find that one has happened. So trust limits are way to limit the amount of your coins that can be spent transitively and, as I said, I'm on twitter. You know, a direct on DM, the a direct a direct transfer like we're familiar with in the arc twenty world, is always possible, but these transitive ones are are limited. And so if I trust you right now, the default is fifty percent. It means I'm willing to exchange fifty percent of my coins. I don't want to one rate with yours, but you could imagine if I wanted to help you get on boarded but I wasn't sure I trust you, I could set that at ten and then the likelihood the amount of your coins I might wake up with tomorrow is going to be a lot less but you know, if we were very close, I might also set it to a hundred, which you know. So that's saying if I have, if I have a hundred John Tokens, and somebody wants to buy a couch from somebody who trust me, a friend of yours lay like I, it could be that if I trust you one hundred percent, then I might end up with a hundred Sarah Tokens in this transaction and but then my hundred John Tokens have been forwarded on to the then the seller of this couch. It's that correct? Yep, exactly. But currently, you're saying, did you say that? That the trust? Because in the Ui it's a binary right. I trust you or I do not trust you, and you don't really get to set the waiting it's currently the UI is setting it to fifty percent. Is that correct? Yeah, exactly. Hmm, I see right now there are a number of features that the contracts enable that are not rolled out in the Ui for reasons of limiting scope so that you actually watch some day. But I think those things, that those will the plan is to roll those things out over time. I think it makes so much sense. Like if, even if just having to. I think people are already certainly to navigate the WHO do I trust? What are the implications of trust? Have adding the friction of and how much do I you know, what score do I give this person? I think would really have pampered the uptake, but it'd be awesome to hear about what some of those like, what some of the things that are in the contracts that aren't currently in the in the Ui itself are, as well as maybe some things that could have been in the contracts but would have been interesting functionality for a UBI system it's itself. Yeah, oh well, we we have. Maybe our most hotly debated feature that did not get in there was limiting the amount of trust you can give to like really make trust scarce. So like you can only trust a maximum of like a hundred people. Dounit or a project that's very, very similar to circles. If you're a fan of circles, you should also investigate donor, don or, don it or, yeah, Du iteer. Okay, so yeah, it's they live a trust to a hundred people. We eventually did not do it, but I had a really crazy moment like three days for we're supposed to latch the contracts, which is like maybe I should just add it but turn it off. But if someone wants to like fork circles someday, the code'll already be there. And I was like no, stock Togor the contract, you're supposed to shift them. So yeah, that's that didn't make it in. Features that are upcoming, though, are adding and managing owners of your nurse safe, which I think is a really important one. It's a better pattern for using circles on two devices than entering your mnemonic on the seecond device, which is the only way to do it now.
We people are definitely going to want circles on mobiles, of point of payment. So that and then also you can imagine adding like your more secure wallet as well. We have a feature for organizations to sign up or businesses to sign up, which is to enter an account into the trust graph that doesn't receive a token because, you know, your local coffee shop doesn't meet the universal basic income like actually, like in a more correct world of the trust graph, you shouldn't trust people that aren't people, and the people add the coffee stop should just be getting the UBI through circles themselves, not this conglomoration of people. Yeah, yeah, exactly. And then, especially for a business, managing the the the people who have keys for it. Again, those two are tied. And then, I guess, the final thing. Oh, two other things that aren't enabled, just to listen all all the things we didn't do. Way To trust, which, like you said, I agree with be refusing for the average user circles, but I think, you know, somewhere in the like advanced settings it should I think it would be really good to have. And also, I think, an ability to override the transitive and send directly in a onetime payment case. So that would be like I see something on a circle's version of craigslist that I want to buy, but there's some actually no trust path between me and this person. But they look at my account, they meet me, they talk to me, the Google me and they find me on some other website. They're like, I'm pretty sure you're real and I can see, I can I can see that you're embedded in a trust graph that is not too far away from mine. I'll accept your coins this one time. So I think that would also be a really nice featured roll out. Nice. Okay, Jay, do you have any any questions right now? I think pretty much covered all the things. It's seems like a really interesting project. I saw it a little bit on crypto twitter. I hadn't not a chance to really take a look into it, but I'm certainly going to now. So very, very interesting. Yeah, thanks. I'm happy to, you know, ramble about it to Y'all and I think it's you know, one of the things that we've talked about for circles, let's see if it happens, because it has a longer timeline, is to sort of publish what happens, you know, how how this project goes, what we hear from our users, how we see it used in different places after, you know, it's been out for a while. So I think that maybe viewers, you listeners of this podcast can may be chicken with us in the years. So also to have some of the answers to the questions that I just can't answer yet with anything but speculation. Yeah, they'd be great. I'll put on the calendar. Oh Man, Oh man, hold me to it. Yeah, I'll just you know, just roup I'll. I just want to say like it is one of the first projects that I felt I could tell my normal friends about that was like relative into them and and that they could fairly easily understand and wasn't totally Eso chaeric and didn't have like seven layers of dependencies that I would have to explain to them before they could see the utility of it. So I'm very I'm very excited about and bullishit about it. I feel like I can you be saying Polish, this is not the context. But but if not circles, perhaps somebody else, like something will, will take the lessons from circles and make something really special happens. So that's always been my hope and if that person is listening, the first thing I would say is get us over this like six times bigger than you think you need. But yeah, I agree. Like you know, circles may not live, but maybe the things that are container than it can beat you some day by another project, though I of course hope that our project does live and it is adopted by both crypto familiar people and people who have no idea what crypto is. That would be a real circle success for me for sure. Okay, Sarah Strap Up, where can people find out more about circles and follow you if...
...they'd like to yeah, so the project is circles UBI. That's the twitter handle as well, circles CBI or circle Zoobi, and then the the website right now is join circles dot met, which has a bit of a quick overview of the project. And I am Sarah Friend and that is is this an art on twitter? Excellent. Okay, thank you so much for joining us. Thank you so much. Yeah, thank go for chatting and have a good that's a good day.
In-Stream Audio SearchNEW
Search across all episodes within this podcast