Trust requires a protocol which is where the 'Guarantee Society' (people-based credit) and 'Capital Partnership' (asset-based credit) agreements may come in.

Within the above trust protocol the Bitcoin blockchain may be based - through a suitable Ricardian instrument (Prepay) - upon 'use value over time' (Utility). This enables the creation of undated prepay credits capable of being objectively priced against a meaningful unit of account.

In my analysis the use over time of Location, Energy, Intellect are all valuable in exchange by reference to a standard unit of energy.

ie an Energy Standard

But there are other types of value, with different metrics: eg Care, and Reputation.

You say *Trust is people-centric*, which is true as far as it goes. I would rather say say *Trust is relationship-centric* within a network of people. This is the same as in physics, in which it is understood that matter may be described both as particles (e.g. atomic nuclei) and as waves (e.g., shared electrons forming molecular bonds); particles correspond to people and waves correspond to relationships. This perspective makes visible a broader range of shared values-in-action that build these relationships. Generalized wealth-in-relationship is the capacity and strength of these relationships, based upon shared principles and values, which may include include property & demand-power, reciprocity & solidarity, reputation & trust, identity & sovereignty, etc. So trust is one of many kinds of wealth, and it inheres in the network of relationships. When we rely upon the transparency of the network in order estimate its inherent overall trust-as-wealth, then privacy becomes a serious issue, as you point out. However, if we focus more on building our personal relationships within the network, then we may consider trust more locally, and then I think privacy remains possible.