Incentive to make transactions often for better estimation of lost coins

[remotemass]

Maybe the protocol should reward addresses that made transactions during the latest interval of 2016 blocks, about every 2 weeks, just about when the network adjusts the difficulty problem.
This would make it more likely that addresses that couldn't participate in the 'freshness reward' were of lost/inacessible coins.
The probability of a bitcoin address getting such 'freshness reward' would be proportional to the balance of that bitcoin address.
So that having many fresh bitcoin addresses with the same amount of coins would give you the same chances of getting the 'freshness reward' in one of them, then if you used only one address and kept it 'fresh'.
This would help having a better and more accurate estimation of lost/inacessible coins.
Imagine such a "lottery" - say, of some 1000 BTC - every two weeks, and for you to be elegible just having to avoid having your coins/addresses completly stagant (as if the coins were lost) during all that time.

This would also be an incentive to have coins, in the first place.

[Killdozer]

Not gonna happen. Too much to change, too small and questionable benefit.

[grantbdev]

Maybe the protocol should reward addresses that made transactions during the latest interval of 2016 blocks, about every 2 weeks, just about when the network adjusts the difficulty problem.
This would make it more likely that addresses that couldn't participate in the 'freshness reward' were of lost/inacessible coins.
The probability of a bitcoin address getting such 'freshness reward' would be proportional to the balance of that bitcoin address.
So that having many fresh bitcoin addresses with the same amount of coins would give you the same chances of getting the 'freshness reward' in one of them, then if you used only one address and kept it 'fresh'.
This would help having a better and more accurate estimation of lost/inacessible coins.
Imagine such a "lottery" - say, of some 1000 BTC - every two weeks, and for you to be elegible just having to avoid having your coins/addresses completly stagant (as if the coins were lost) during all that time.

This would also be an incentive to have coins, in the first place.

What would be the purpose of knowing an estimation of inactive/lost coins? I think the price is a better indicator which implies supply.

[MysteryMiner]

Crackpot idea. No benefit at all. Blockchain hardfork necessary.

[Nemesis]

Maybe the protocol should reward addresses that made transactions during the latest interval of 2016 blocks, about every 2 weeks, just about when the network adjusts the difficulty problem.
This would make it more likely that addresses that couldn't participate in the 'freshness reward' were of lost/inacessible coins.
The probability of a bitcoin address getting such 'freshness reward' would be proportional to the balance of that bitcoin address.
So that having many fresh bitcoin addresses with the same amount of coins would give you the same chances of getting the 'freshness reward' in one of them, then if you used only one address and kept it 'fresh'.
This would help having a better and more accurate estimation of lost/inacessible coins.
Imagine such a "lottery" - say, of some 1000 BTC - every two weeks, and for you to be elegible just having to avoid having your coins/addresses completly stagant (as if the coins were lost) during all that time.

This would also be an incentive to have coins, in the first place.

Oh hi,

Stick to your day job. Dont keep your head occupied with "ideas"

Thanks