Which is why I included this:

>The fact of which must be accepted to varying degrees, or rejected entirely, which requires you to live in isolation.

If you trust nobody in anything, then you cannot live with other humans. If you don't remove yourself, others will remove you, and that's pretty fundamental in any society. So some degree of trust can be assumed to exist, and where it is placed is entirely outside anyone else's control. If there is none in anyone else helping on the computational trust chain, then to have any trustable system you must do it yourself or go without. There is no middle road.

I should also clarify that I'm not claiming we have anything quite like this today. Merely that such a system is possible - the compiler chain is bootstrap-able with minimal effort and determining your measure of trust of any given build is straightforward: if there's a gap in the chain, the answer is no, until someone you trust fills it in. If not, then yes.

edit: in any case, trust, like the communication it is founded on, is an inherently un-decidable problem. At some point, to do anything, some measure of blind trust must exist - for example, my belief that this universe is rational in a way humans can comprehend. Thus, if anything has been done, some trust exists, and the system is bootstrapped.