Trust isn't really a feature of blockchains, nor is it a byproduct (or "software primitive") of blockchains. Bitcoin was designed to avoid a need for trust, so it really just steps around the issue of trust in a distributed ledger.<p>This is a critical misunderstanding that a lot of people are still preaching and perpetuating. You can't really build systems that rely on trust on top of a blockchain, and those who have tried are mostly just moving (human/corruptible) authorities of trust to more obscure places. You <i>can</i>, however, build systems that do not require trust on top of a blockchain, though there are some very serious limitations that confine those systems/applications to digital-only transactions.<p>In other words, I can be reasonably assured that the Bitcoin you sent me is spendable by me (that it hasn't been double-spent) and that a government can't just issue 21 million more Bitcoin tomorrow, but that tells me <i>absolutely nothing</i> about whether or not I can (currently or in the future) "trust" your address on the blockchain, nor can it be tied to any kind of meaningful identity without reintroducing a real-world authority that requires my trust.<p>Bitcoin has proven itself to be useful on the payment side of transactions, but I'm unconvinced that blockchain tech will ever be able to facilitate the delivery side of transactions (unless it's a digital asset being delivered) without compromising the fundamental aims of Bitcoin.