…
Bitcoin without pruning is trustless by design (though maybe not 100% in practice). You can verify everything yourself. With pruning it is not trustless even by design.
You keep saying this. Why?
Because trustlessness is the foundation upon which Bitcoin is built.
My node could leave the network for a few months, and, upon rejoining, determine the state of the ledger without requiring
any new information beyond what is encoded in the candidate blockchains. To do this, my node considers all valid chains and selects as the "best chain" the one with the highest cumulative work.
If it was not possible to verify every transaction (including the pruned ones) then how would my node know that nothing "funny" occurred while it was not connected? Maybe some coins got moved without valid signatures? [That being said, I'm still supportive of pruning--it's just that it must always remain possible for nodes to verify all transactions right back to the genesis block].
Remember, this trustlessness is one property that separates a PoW system from a PoS system. For example, a Nxt node needs
new information upon rejoining the network (what they call economic clustering) in addition to what's encoded in the candidate blockchains. I think this "not-quite-trustless-by-design" property of PoS is what Vitalik et al. refer to as "weak subjectivity."