Quote from: Spinning99 on Today at 04:48:37 PM

Can is a very far fetched world in which this will never happen for 99.999% tokens or coins. Sure I would say that it is possible to be precise, but it is very improbable and this needs to be made clear. Most coins and tokens are completely dead and they are never coming back. If they do come back, it is a scam attempt by someone as this tactic is regularly used in every cycle. Anyhow, we have enough tokens and coins we don't need more.

Absolutely.

We have even been seeing and hearing-about total-scam pretend "revivals" of some of these classic ancient coins, sometimes seemingly picking some block from way way back in time when they had lots of the coin to fork from so in effect double-spending coins they already spent years ago; and sometimes just totally jumping off to a new chain lacking any connection to the original still-running ancient chain.

See for example https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=46478.msg65456349#msg65456349 about their fake FairBriX...

Of course FairBriX's treasury from which the Galactic Milieu calculates its treasury-based computed values seems unlikely to apply to some fake trumped-up pretend-revival of a coin that was already running all these many years, rather probably we will simply wait for the real, original chain to be continued from the high-difficulty block at which the scammers' mining abruptly vanished, presumably running off to hash some other scam-chain.

Noting the use of the "treasuries" system though could be a useful datum to help pick out the 0.001% of tokens or coins that might yet somehow manage to fetch themselves far back from the obscurity that evidently motivates the scammers to "revive" something that never (at least until they marooned it at high difficulty to stall its blockchain for gosh knows how long to come) died...

A nice side-effect of tokenisation is the tokens allow trading to continue even while the blockchain is marooned at a high difficulty waiting for its low hash rate to get it moving again, which is really just a side-effect of insulating the value from the dangers of the low hash rate by allowing for example hardcoded checkpoints to be coded into the node software following any "bailing in" of actual blockchain coins to the tokens/trading platform so that the tokens on the trading platform represent coins locked into place against double-spends by such checkpoints.

In the case of FairBriX it doesn't even seem necessary to create such a checkpoint to protect against whatever scam-chain they jumped off to, as even running the updated code that an old guard code-maintainer built for them before realising they were scammers the genuine original chain does not acknowlege the last of their scam-chains I tested. Though I suppose they could just keep on inventing new scam chains until they hit on one that will continue the original chain if no such checkpoint is created to protect the point that they did mine the original chain up to.

-MarkM-