I think it would have helped if you linked to the timestamp[1] where he started talking to encourage discussion, 5h47m in for anyone wanting to watch it. I recommend at 2x. It's a very interesting presentation, from the history to the mechanics of how it works, to the possibilities.
It's interesting to hear about how it originated in a research group in Russia led by KK Likharev, and how the students were poached to the USA and are now at retirement age there. That it was funded by the USSR to out compete IBM superconducting and Sutherland thinks[2] his group did with SFQ .
Sutherland was interested in wafer probers for the purpose of SFQ research that work at superconducting temperatures, he asked where he could get one and was told four were shipped to China[3]. Relevant relating to how USA is falling behind possibly, and there are sanctions on nVidia sending the latest in GPU/compute to China, but this happened.
What if instead of passing tokens, checksums were passed and the function checked that its code matched the checksum. This would give some protection against both corruption of the code and instruction pointer errors.
Another element from the article was having copies of the function and comparing the return values, but I suspect this breaks down when the function deals with external state. Possibly it could be done by intercepting the state-related calls and making them atomic/combining them. I feel like there's something here reminding me of STM [0].
I suspect it will always be a better investment of time and result in scalable and simpler applications to go for the hardware required to get a full ECC-covered execution architecture.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KMVV3ErGSVY