以區塊鏈技術為基礎，數碼優先治理架構組織人類社會，已經由cypherpunk理想蛻變為投入數十億資本的實踐。 Network states 或許係現時最具野心，重塑社群形成、自治、同傳統國家既關係嘅嘗試之一。
概念提出者Balaji Srinivasan將network state定義為「高度一致嘅網上社群，有能力作集體行動，群眾集資喺全球購置領地，最終獲得現有國家嘅外交承認。」
呢個睇似簡單嘅定義，其實隱藏住一個複雜理論體系，挑戰緊有關主權、公民身份、同數碼年代治理嘅基本假設。愛沙尼亞e-Residency計劃，擁有超過126,500位數碼居民，創造二億四千四百萬歐元經濟效益，證明數碼公民身份模式嘅可行性。而例如Praxis Society獲得5.25億美元融資，亦反映投資者對另類治理實驗有信心。
Network states興起，反映傳統領土主權同數碼社群無國界本質之間更廣泛矛盾。當去中心化自治組織（DAO）通過代幣治理管理數十億資產，而特色經濟區試驗區塊鏈融合法律系統，理論同現實之間界線越來越模糊。
要明白network states，需要分析佢地嘅哲學基礎、技術架構、現行實驗、監管挑戰，同未來對人類組織模式嘅影響。
理論基礎同思想來源
Network states汲取自多方面思想傳統，經歷幾十年科技同政治演變至今。最直接的哲學前身係Albert Hirschman 1970年提出嘅「退出、發聲與忠誠」理論，分析人喺組織衰退或不滿時以何反應。傳統政治強調「發聲」——透過民主參與改變體制；network states則首重「退出」作為政治改變嘅核心途徑。
這個偏向退出的哲學可追溯至奧地利學派經濟學，尤其係F.A. Hayek提倡的自發秩序理論。Hayek認為複雜協調來自「人的行動而非意圖」，市場如資訊處理系統，比中央規劃更有效組織分散知識。Network states將呢種邏輯擴展到治理本身，將政治體系當做市場，公民可以「用雙腳投票」——而家則係用數碼錢包同網絡參與。
1990年代cypherpunk運動提供技術想像，支持呢種理念。Timothy May嘅《加密無政府主義宣言》同Eric Hughes提出「私隱係電子時代開放社會所需」，確立咗「科技而唔係法律捍衛個人自由」的原則。John Perry Barlow嘅《網絡空間獨立宣言》都話Cyberspace唔受傳統主權約束，創造新實驗領土。
2009年比特幣問世，首度實現cypherpunk理念，證明去中心共識可協調全球網絡，毋須傳統機構授權。Ethereum智能合約更令治理可編程化，為network states提供所需技術基礎。
Srinivasan創意係糅合上述傳統，環繞「道德創新」——即network states以「其他人認為唔啱」的共同價值組織社群，反之亦然。可以有關「糖唔健康」健康社群、傳統宗教社區、以至新生活方式實驗，藉此提供社群凝聚力，就合理化分離治理模式同激發成立network所需的目標感。
這套哲學框架，明確否定傳統國家領土為本。國家「先有土地，分人去」，network states就「先有思想，吸納人成為network一員」。呢種「先雲端、後土地，但唔係永遠無土地」策略，徹底改寫政治社群形成同維繫方式。
有學者批評呢套理論，話佢係「第二次資產階級革命合法化宣言」，強化跨國資本權利，並以私有產權限制人類自由。民主理論家擔心自願組成同包容治理矛盾，實用主義者質疑純粹數碼社群能否產生有效集體行動所需社會凝聚力。
技術基礎同治理機制
Network states底層倚賴高階區塊鏈技術，實現去中心身份、可編程治理、同密碼驗證共識。要理解呢啲系統，需分析現時能力同限制。
去中心身份系統係數碼公民身份骨幹。World Wide Web Consortium制定Decentralized Identifiers (DIDs) 標準，令身份識別由用戶掌控，無需靠中央權威。配合Verifiable Credentials，技術架構師稱之為「自我主權身份」，即個人獨立管理身份證明，不受傳統機構限制。
實際應用亦見成效。例如歐洲區塊鏈服務基建發行官方電子文憑、社保證件；加國Verifiable Organizations Network處理商業牌照發放；德國聯邦eID項目創建數碼身分證。呢啲系統運用公開/私隱匙密碼學保護證書防篡改，匿名證明技術如零知識證明（Zero-knowledge proof）可只證明年齡而無須透露出生日期。
智能合約治理架構，已經由早期試驗進步不少。MakerDAO嘅Chief/Pause/Spell架構係現時業界標準，將提案審批、執行延緩、同自動實施分開；Chief Contract處理審批投票，Pause Contract中介執行延遲，Spell Contract為單次執行通道。
Compound Protocol嘅GovernorBravo系統支援複雜提案與代表委託，Aave治理流程則經多階段，例如初步提溫檢查、改善提案到鏈上投票。佢地總共管理數十億資產，過程公正、透明且可編程，傳統機構難以比擬。
投票系統有好多創新，但問題仍多。現時多數用代幣權重投票，導致「鯨魚」持大量代幣者影響力過大，有寡頭化憂慮。二次投票（Quadratic Voting）可以透過票權比例調整緩解，但要嚴格反Sybil措施同密碼投票包裝防止作弊。
Liquid democracy又提供另一種路徑，可以轉授可撤回代表權，但管理授權鏈同防止循環很複雜。當鏈上參與愈多，gas成本遞增，所以要用 O(log n)鏈上計算複雜度同鏈下預處理去優化。
保護私隱技術令匿名參與又可保持系統誠信。零知識SNARK可數學證明投票資格兼保障身份，類似Tornado Cash公開代幣祕密控制方式。安全多方計算則可分散統計結果而不透露單一取態，但要精密設計門限密碼系統。
延展性挑戰明顯。現時主流區塊鏈治理平台每秒僅可處理15-50次交易，以太坊主網每個治理提案成本高達$50-500美金。Layer 2像Polygon、Arbitrum可減少90%成本，State channel可以鏈下集合投票定期上鏈結算。但用戶體驗依然複雜，現時只適合精通技術人員參與。
協作與互通解決方案進展迅速。Chainlink’s Cross-Chain Interoperability Protocol提供router contract同風險管理網絡…… enable governance decisions from Ethereum Layer 1 to propagate across multiple chains. Uniswap V3's multi-chain deployment demonstrates unified governance across 5+ networks, while projects like Unlock Protocol use Connext bridges for cross-chain DAO architecture.
讓以太坊 Layer 1 的治理決策能夠推展到多條鏈。Uniswap V3 的多鏈部署展示了橫跨五個以上網絡的統一治理，而 Unlock Protocol 等項目則利用 Connext 橋進行跨鏈 DAO 架構。
Security considerations remain paramount. Flash loan attacks enable temporary token acquisition for governance manipulation, while oracle manipulation can affect governance decisions that depend on price feeds. The DAO hack of 2016 demonstrated the consequences of reentrancy vulnerabilities, leading to industry-wide adoption of security best practices including formal verification, multi-signature requirements, and mandatory timelocks for governance execution.
安全考慮仍然至關重要。閃電貸攻擊能夠讓人臨時獲取大量代幣去操控治理，而預言機操控則會影響依賴價格數據的治理決策。2016 年 DAO 被黑客入侵顯示了重入漏洞的嚴重後果，促使業界廣泛採用各種安全最佳實踐，包括形式化驗證、多重簽署要求，以及治理執行時強制設立時延鎖定。
Current implementations and real-world experiments
The landscape of network state experimentation reveals a diverse ecosystem of projects attempting to bridge digital community building with physical world impact. These implementations provide crucial data about both the potential and practical limitations of blockchain-based governance models.
網絡國家實驗的現況顯示出一個多元化的生態系統，不同項目都在嘗試把數碼社群建設與現實世界產生連結。這些實踐為區塊鏈治理模型的潛力及實際限制提供了寶貴數據。
Praxis Society represents the most well-funded network state experiment globally, raising $525 million in 2024 - the largest single financing for a network state project. With 14,000 members across 84 countries whose companies aggregate to $452 billion in valuation, Praxis demonstrates significant community-building success. The project is exploring sites in Latin America and Mediterranean regions for its initial 1,000-acre development targeting 10,000 residents, with a decision expected in Q1 2025.
Praxis Society 是全球資金最充裕的網絡國家實驗，於 2024 年籌得 5.25 億美元，成為歷來最大規模的單一網絡國家項目融資。其 14,000 名成員分佈於 84 個國家，旗下企業總估值達到 4,520 億美元，展現了顯著的社群發展成績。項目正於拉丁美洲及地中海地區物色初期 1,000 英畝發展用地，以容納 10,000 名居民，並預計 2025 年第一季作出決定。
Praxis operates through a hybrid governance model combining online community building with traditional city development. Their PRAX credits reward system measures community contributions, while partnerships with Web3 communities, AI companies like ShogAI, and longevity tech firms create a focused ecosystem. However, the project faces criticism over founder political affiliations and questions about practical implementation versus utopian vision.
Praxis 採用結合線上社群建設與傳統城市發展的混合治理模式。他們的 PRAX 積分獎勵系統用以衡量社群貢獻，並與多個 Web3 社群、AI 公司如 ShogAI 以及長壽科技企業建立合作，營造一個專注的生態圈。不過外界針對創辦人的政治立場，以及計劃由理想主義到實務層面的實現，提出不少質疑和批評。
Vitalia, operating within Honduras' Próspera ZEDE, focuses on longevity biotech research with 200+ residents during pop-up periods and $120-150 million in backing. The project achieves 70% faster regulatory approval processes for biotech research compared to traditional jurisdictions, hosting multiple conferences and attracting biotech companies for experimental medical protocols. This demonstrates how network state concepts can accelerate innovation in specific domains through regulatory arbitrage.
Vitalia 於洪都拉斯 Próspera ZEDE 區內運作，專注於長壽生物科技研究，在短暫駐留期間有 200 多名居民，並獲得 1.2 至 1.5 億美元資助。該項目的生物科技研究獲批過程比起傳統法域快 70%，並曾舉辦多場會議，以及吸引生科企業參與醫療創新試驗，顯示網絡國家概念可透過監管套利，加速某些領域的創新。
Estonia's e-Residency program provides the most successful example of government-led digital citizenship. With 126,500 e-residents from 179 nationalities, the program has generated €244 million in economic impact with a 7.6:1 return on investment. E-residents have founded 36,000 Estonian companies, representing 38% of all Estonian startups. The program achieves a world record company formation time of 15 minutes 33 seconds, with 100% online processes that save e-residents an average of 5 working days annually.
愛沙尼亞的 e-Residency（電子居留）計劃是政府主導數碼公民身份最成功的例子。計劃有來自 179 個國家、共 126,500 名電子居民，帶來 2.44 億歐元經濟效益，投資回報比率高達 7.6:1。電子居民成立了 36,000 間愛沙尼亞公司，佔該國初創總數的 38%。公司註冊過程全程線上，僅需 15 分 33 秒，為全球最快，全年可為電子居民節省平均 5 個工作日的時間。
The program's success stems from providing concrete economic value - EU business environment access from anywhere globally - combined with sophisticated digital infrastructure. Digital signatures carry legal equivalence to handwritten signatures, while the system maintains 78% adoption rates among those aware of the program. Recent applications show strong growth from Spain, Ukraine, and post-Brexit British entrepreneurs seeking EU access.
此計劃成功關鍵在於提供具體經濟價值 —— 全球任何地方都可接觸到歐盟營商環境 —— 結合先進數碼基建。電子簽署擁有法定地位，與手寫簽名相等，而對該計劃有認知的群體中，採用率亦高達 78%。最新申請者資料顯示，來自西班牙、烏克蘭及英國脫歐後尋求進入歐盟市場的英國創業家都大幅增長。
DAO governance provides extensive real-world performance data across thousands of implementations managing billions in collective assets. MakerDAO, with its DAI stablecoin exceeding $5 billion circulation, represents the most mature example of decentralized governance managing complex financial systems. The protocol successfully navigated major market stress events including the March 2020 crash while maintaining its 150% collateralization requirement through community voting on stability fees and collateral types.
DAO 治理在數千個實際案例中管理着數十億資產，為現實世界提供了大量數據。以 MakerDAO 為例，其 DAI 穩定幣流通量超過 50 億美元，是去中心化治理複雜金融系統最成熟的例子。這個協議成功應對了包括 2020 年 3 月市場暴跌等重大市場壓力，並透過社群投票調節穩定費和抵押品種類，維持 150% 抵押要求。
However, participation challenges persist across the DAO ecosystem. Typical governance participation ranges from 5-15% of token holders, with major decisions often determined by 350-500 active voters. Power concentration is significant, with the most active 10% of voters controlling 76.2% of voting power across major DAOs. Compound DAO's July 2024 governance attack, where the Goldenboys group acquired 499,000 COMP tokens worth $25 million to influence DAO decisions, demonstrates both the vulnerability and resilience of these systems.
然而，DAO 生態系持續面對參與率問題。一般治理參與人數僅達代幣持有人總數的 5-15%，重大決策通常由 350-500 名活躍投票者決定。權力高度集中，最活躍的一成投票者控制着主要 DAO 76.2% 的投票權。2024 年 7 月 Compound DAO 遭遇治理攻擊，Goldenboys 團隊花 2,500 萬美元買入 499,000 枚 COMP 代幣，意圖左右決策，反映這些系統既有脆弱亦見韌性。
The quarterly decline of 15% in voter participation without active engagement strategies reveals the ongoing challenge of maintaining democratic legitimacy. Gas fees create additional barriers, with smaller token holders showing high price sensitivity to voting costs. This suggests that technical optimizations could significantly democratize participation if implemented effectively.
如果無主動推動參與策略，每季投票人數會下跌約 15%，突顯持續維持民主正當性的困難。Gas 費造成額外門檻，規模較小的代幣持有人對投票成本極為敏感。這說明若能有效實行技術優化，參與民主化可大幅提升。
Charter city experiments reveal the complexities of physical-world integration. Próspera ZEDE operates under Honduras' Zone for Employment and Economic Development framework with its own legal system, tax regime, and civil codes. The 58-acre initial development on Roatán Island has attracted $500+ million in committed foreign direct investment with targeted employment of 10,000+ direct jobs.
特許城市實驗反映實體世界結合的複雜性。Próspera ZEDE 依靠洪都拉斯的就業與經濟發展特區框架，自行設有法律、稅制和民事法規。羅丹島 58 英畝的首期發展已吸引超過 5 億美元外來直接投資，目標創造超過一萬個直接職位。
Próspera's governance innovation includes businesses selecting regulations from approved foreign jurisdictions, private arbitration courts, and Bitcoin recognition alongside USD. Tax structure includes 1% business revenue, 5% wages, 2.5% sales tax, and 5% personal income tax - competitive rates designed to attract international business.
Próspera 的治理創新包括企業可選擇經批准的外國法域規則；設有私人仲裁法庭，並與美元一同承認比特幣。稅制設計亦極具競爭力，包括 1% 營業額、5% 薪金、2.5% 銷售稅及 5% 個人入息稅，以吸引國際企業。
However, legal challenges threaten the entire ZEDE framework. President Xiomara Castro's administration repealed the ZEDE law in 2022, and the Honduran Supreme Court declared ZEDEs illegal in September 2024. Próspera has filed an $11 billion ICSID claim against Honduras, demonstrating how network state experiments can conflict with traditional sovereign authority even when operating within legal frameworks.
然而，法律挑戰威脅整個 ZEDE 框架。洪都拉斯總統 Xiomara Castro 於 2022 年廢除 ZEDE 法例，最高法院更於 2024 年 9 月裁定 ZEDE 違憲。Próspera 已就此向國際投資爭端解決中心（ICSID）提出 110 億美元索償申訴，顯示即使按法定架構運作，網絡國家實驗仍可能與傳統主權發生衝突。
El Salvador's Bitcoin legal tender experiment provides crucial lessons about top-down cryptocurrency implementation. Despite making Bitcoin legal tender in September 2021 and investing $150 million in a 6,102 Bitcoin strategic reserve, adoption remained limited. Only 8% of Salvadorans used Bitcoin regularly by 2024, with 92% of citizens avoiding Bitcoin transactions. Business adoption was similarly low, with 86% of businesses recording zero Bitcoin transactions.
薩爾瓦多把比特幣列為法定貨幣的實驗，為自上而下推行加密貨幣帶來重要教訓。雖於 2021 年 9 月將比特幣定為法定貨幣，並以 1.5 億美元儲備 6,102 枚比特幣，但普及程度始終有限。到 2024 年，經常使用比特幣的薩爾瓦多人僅佔 8%，有 92% 市民完全不做比特幣交易。商業採用亦非常低，86% 企業都從未收過比特幣。
The government's $45 million loss on Bitcoin investments by September 2023, combined with IMF pressure requiring scaling back Bitcoin's mandatory status for a $1.4 billion Extended Fund Facility, led to policy reversal in January 2025. Bitcoin is no longer mandatory legal tender, operating only through voluntary private sector adoption. The experiment demonstrates how network state principles face resistance when imposed rather than adopted voluntarily.
政府在 2023 年 9 月因買賣比特幣而虧損四千五百萬美元，加上國際貨幣基金（IMF）要求政府廢除比特幣法定地位以換取 14 億美元長期基金支援，最終於 2025 年 1 月徹底撤回強制政策。現時比特幣只在有意願的私人部門流通，已不再具有強制法定貨幣地位。這個實驗證明，網絡國家原則如以強推形式落實將會遭遇更大阻力。
These implementations collectively reveal several patterns. Successful projects like Estonia's e-Residency provide concrete economic value while operating within existing legal frameworks. Community-driven experiments like Praxis and Vitalia show strong engagement but face scaling challenges. DAO governance works for managing digital assets but struggles with inclusive participation. Charter cities face significant political resistance even with legal authorization.
這些案例總結出若干趨勢。像愛沙尼亞 e-Residency 這類的成功項目，能夠於現有法制下帶來具體經濟效益；以社群主導的 Praxis 與 Vitalia，參與度高但難以規模化；DAO 制度管理數字資產成效顯著，但民主參與困難；而特許城市即使有法律授權，仍難避免政治阻力。
Legal and regulatory landscape
The legal environment surrounding network states, digital citizenship, and blockchain governance presents a complex patchwork of regulatory approaches, enforcement actions, and evolving frameworks that significantly impact implementation strategies.
包圍網絡國家、數字公民身份與區塊鏈治理的法律環境千變萬化，由多種監管方式、執法措施與發展中法規組成，對實際推行策略有重大影響。
United States regulators have taken increasingly aggressive enforcement positions that create substantial compliance challenges for network state initiatives. The SEC's 2017 DAO Report established that governance tokens can constitute securities under the Howey test if they create expectations of profits from others' efforts. The agency's 2025 guidance clarifies that tokens controlled by core teams, pre-mined, or promoted with value-growth promises will likely face securities classification.
美國監管機構日益加強執法力度，令網絡國家計劃遇到重大合規困難。美國證監會（SEC）2017 年的 DAO 報告訂明，若治理代幣令公眾預期他人努力帶來盈利，根據 Howey 測試就有可能被視為證券。2025 年的新指引更明確指出，若代幣由核心團隊控制、預先挖礦，或透過推廣宣傳會升值，便有很高機會被歸類為證券。
The CFTC's 2022 Ooki DAO enforcement action represents the most significant regulatory development, establishing a novel legal theory where all DAO governance token voters are treated as "members" of an unincorporated association, making them jointly and severally liable for regulatory violations. This strict liability standard imposes responsibility regardless of intent or knowledge, creating strong disincentives for governance participation that could undermine the decentralized decision-making that network states require.
美國商品期貨交易委員會（CFTC）2022 年對 Ooki DAO 的執法行動，是監管史上的一大轉捩點。當局首次引入新理論，把所有 DAO 治理投票代幣持有人視為非法人協會成員，令他們一同對違規行為承擔連帶責任。這種「嚴格責任」標準，不問動機、知情與否，直接讓參與治理風險極高，極大地阻礙網絡國家所需的去中心化決策。
European regulatory approaches demonstrate more measured but still complex frameworks. The Markets in Crypto-Assets (MiCA) regulation explicitly excludes "fully decentralized" DAOs and DeFi protocols from regulation, but most DAOs fail the "full decentralization" test due to centralized elements. Parliamentary discussions suggest future MiCA v2 iterations will bring DAOs within the regulatory framework through entity designation requirements, though implementation details remain unclear.
歐洲監管較為溫和，但體系依然繁複。加密資產市場（MiCA）法規明確排除「完全去中心化」的 DAO 及 DeFi 協議，但大多數 DAO 因參雜中心化元素，難通過「完全去中心化」測試。歐洲議會討論暗示未來 MiCA v2 將以法團註冊的方式納入 DAO 監管，但細節仍未確定。
Switzerland provides the most sophisticated blockchain governance framework through its 2021 DLT Act, creating legal basis for "ledger-based securities" and DLT trading facilities. However, the framework maintains requirements for licensed intermediaries, preventing truly decentralized arrangements while enabling regulated blockchain-based governance systems.
瑞士於 2021 年推出 DLT 法案，建立了「賬本型證券」及分布式賬本交易設施的法律基礎，是當前最先進的區塊鏈治理框架。不過法例仍要求中介需獲發牌照，未能真正實現完全去中心化，但容許受規管的區塊鏈治理系統存在。
Securities law implications create significant challenges for governance token distribution. Centralized control by founding teams, marketing suggesting token appreciation, and investment contract characteristics all trigger securities classification under most jurisdictions' frameworks. Wyoming's DUNA
證券法例對治理代幣發行帶來重重困難。無論是創辦團隊集中控權，以代幣升值作為推廣賣點，還是涉及投資合約性質，絕大部分法域都會界定為證券。懷俄明州的 DUNA(Decentralized Unincorporated Nonprofit Association) 結構嘗試以非牟利身份規避證券分類，不過聯邦監管機構即使在不同法團結構下都有可能主張監管權。
稅務合規對於網絡國家參與者而言，帶來特別複雜的挑戰。美國以公民身份為徵稅基礎，意味著美國公民即使身處海外或參與網絡國家，依然需要申報全球收入，2025年最多只能用外國賺取收入扣除額 (Foreign Earned Income Exclusion) 減免 $130,000。DAO 代幣持有人可能會被當作合夥企業徵稅，而懷俄明DUNA結構則有望以非牟利身份帶來潛在優勢。
國際稅務協調方面，FATCA申報要求、Form 8938 海外資產披露，以及潛在的FBAR申報義務均為參與者帶來重大合規負擔。多個國家實施針對數碼平台收入的數碼服務稅（Digital Services Taxes），可能令網絡國家同時要履行多重稅務責任。而OECD所推進BEPS框架談判，中美分歧依然未能化解美國反對立場。
私隱及數據保障合規方面，監管規定與去中心化原則之間有根本衝突。GDPR預設有中心化的數據控制人，這種假設與真正的去中心化結構不符；而區塊鏈不可修改性則與「被遺忘權」規定出現衝突。所有DAO參與者均可能須對GDPR違規（可高達€2,000萬或全球收入4%罰款）承擔連帶法律責任。
反洗錢及「了解你的客戶」規定同樣帶來困難。FATF 標準將為交易、託管或發行提供服務的DAO歸類為虛擬資產服務供應商（VASP），需獲得牌照及受監管；不過，一般的治理代幣持有人通常仍不包括在VASP定義之內。「控制或有足夠影響力」的測試決定監管適用範圍，但不同司法管轄區執行標準並不一致。
爭議解決機制在去中心化治理架構中運作困難。傳統法律救濟往往因牽涉全球參與者而難以確立合適訴訟法庭，虛擬身份環境下的送達亦屬複雜。基於區塊鏈的資產難以追回，多簽控制又加劇傳統查封程序的障礙。
如Kleros等鏈上仲裁系統為去中心化提供替代方案，但其執行力僅限於鏈上資產及智能合約改動。結合傳統仲裁與區塊鏈證據保存的混合方案雖然具潛力，但其法律承認度就視乎不同司法區域。
新興立法發展反映監管模式不斷演變。美國國會多份草案有意釐清CFTC與SEC的監管分工，同時對足夠去中心化的網絡設下「安全港」制度。州層面創新包括增設更多有利於DAO的法例、允許區塊鏈治理試驗的監管沙盒，以及跨州協議協調規管。
國際協作方面，包括聯合國網絡安全及數碼主權工作組、歐盟正考慮統一DAO監管路線，還有G20就全球最低標準討論。不過，由於國家利益衝突和技術複雜性，高層協調仍然進展緩慢。
要成功合規，策略上需基於風險作司法管轄區分析，識別所有潛在適用監管框架；優化組織架構（考慮懷俄明DUNA作非牟利，或選用離岸架構作監管套利）；加強文件紀錄保存，建立合規審計軌跡。
法律不明朗持續為網絡國家發展帶來重大挑戰，同時亦推動法律及技術雙軌創新。去中心化理念與監管合規要求之間的矛盾，很大程度上將決定哪些治理模型能夠於現行國際體制內成功擴展。
經濟模式及可持續性挑戰
網絡國家利用複雜的經濟架構，結合傳統政府融資模型與區塊鏈原生創新方法。要了解這些模式，需分析理論潛力及實際推行困難。
代幣經濟框架的功能遠超投票治理。有研究顯示，DAO議案通過會令代幣回報平均提升4.7%，而投票參與度每上升一個標準差，效果更提升2.2%。這代表積極參與治理能創造實質經濟價值，將個人激勵與集體決策素質掛鈎。
最成功的實例多採用「雙代幣」設計，治理與實用性分開。以MakerDAO的MKR/DAI 模型為例，MKR負責治理決策，DAI則作為穩定幣使用。MKR的通縮機制（當協議產生盈餘會銷毀MKR代幣）把治理質素與代幣價值直接連結。這種設計在重大的市場壓力情況下仍然抗跌，而DAI亦一直維持$50億以上流通額的穩定性。
資金庫管理在DAO生態已發展成為專業學科。全球超過25,000個DAO合共管理$140億至$215億資產，但81.67%的大型DAO資金庫主要持有自家原生代幣，產生高度集中風險。這會形成危險的反饋循環，因為在治理決策中代幣價值直接影響DAO營運資金能力。
較成熟的DAO已開始採用專業的資金庫管理措施，包括多簽安全協議（一般3-of-5或者5-of-9配置）、多元資產配置策略，以及結合DeFi收益的進階投資方案。資金庫續命能力分析顯示，大型DAO一般可維持2至4年操作資金，不過燃燒率視乎開發活動及參與者薪酬結構而大有不同。
公共產品資助機制或許是網絡國家經濟最具創意部分。二次方資助（Quadratic Funding, QF）用數學優化方法，民主地分配資源，資助額是所有個別捐款金額平方根總和的平方。這種計算方式重視捐贈人數多於金額大小，可減少大戶對資助分配的影響力。Gitcoin透過QF模式已分配超過$200萬，證明這方法具實用性。
逆向公共財資助（Retroactive Public Goods Funding, RPGF）提供另一選擇，原則是「回顧過去覺得有用的，比預測將來更容易一致」。Optimism第三輪向項目分發了3,000萬OP代幣（等值逾$4,000萬），Solana等亦有類似機制，逐漸被更多項目採用。這種模式為公共財提供「類初創融資循環」，有望解決公共財難以持續資助之問題。
愛沙尼亞電子居民(e-Residency)計劃是現時政府主導數碼公民方案中，經濟表現數據最完整的例子。該計劃自2014年起產生總經濟影響€2.44億，投資回報比率7.6:1，單是2023年直接貢獻已達€6,740萬。稅收連續增長兩年（2022-2023）高達33%，當中76%來自勞動稅，24%來自股息收入。
電子居民創立的愛沙尼亞公司已超過31,800間，佔全國初創企業38%，產生明顯經濟乘數效應。來自185國的多樣化參與帶來韌性，而自負盈虧的營運模式及正現金流顯示無需政府持續補貼亦可自我維持。
不過，可持續性挑戰於多個網絡國家實驗中依然明顯。大多數DAO現時績效為負，需要戰略重整，代幣持倉過重導致高波動性帶來營運不穩。對加密貨幣市場周期的依賴同時影響參與度及資金庫續命力，而資產及收入來源過度集中產生系統性風險。
參與經濟學反映值得關注的現象。一般DAO只有5-15%代幣持有人參與治理，民主正當性有限，而最活躍的10%控制76.2%投票權益，更令人憂慮寡頭壟斷。燃氣費（Gas Fee）增加參與門檻，持小量代幣者對價格變動非常敏感，可能被排除在有意義的治理程序外。
網絡國家內的財富分配模式與更廣泛加密圈常見的不均現象一致。先行者效應令財富嚴重集中，而技術門檻高亦令普通用戶難以參與。網絡效應令老牌巨頭佔優，而錢包管理及DeFi複雜性排除了不少潛在參與者。
針對上述問題的補救方案包括如GoodDollar 逾75萬人社群試行的全民基本收入，微型質押及集體參與機制減少個人財務門檻，以及傾向小戶的漸進式獎勵制度。但這些方法多屬實驗性，規模成效仍有限。
網絡國家實驗的收入模式分析shows wide variation in sustainability approaches. Transaction fees provide primary revenue for most protocols, while membership fees enable subscription-based access models. Service premiums offer value-added services for premium tiers, investment returns from treasury management generate additional income, and partnerships create revenue sharing opportunities with complementary platforms.
展現出可持續發展策略上嘅廣泛差異。交易費係大部分協議主要嘅收入來源，而會員費則容許以訂閱制方式獲取服務。服務溢價為高級層會員提供增值服務，國庫管理嘅投資回報能帶來額外收入，而夥伴合作就可以同其他互補平台進行收益分成。
The economic competition dynamics between network states and traditional jurisdictions create both opportunities and risks. Small nations like Estonia, Malta, and Singapore are particularly incentivized to participate in digital governance innovation, while traditional tax havens evolve toward digital services. However, regulatory arbitrage opportunities may be curtailed as international coordination improves and compliance costs increase.
網絡國家同傳統司法管轄區之間嘅經濟競爭動態帶嚟機遇同風險。愛沙尼亞、馬耳他、新加坡等細國家特別有動力參與數碼治理創新，而傳統避稅天堂亦正向數字服務轉型。不過，隨住國際協調提升同遵規成本上升，監管套利空間有可能被壓縮。
Successful economic models require balancing autonomy with integration into existing financial systems. The most sustainable approaches provide concrete economic value to participants while operating within established legal frameworks, diversify revenue streams to reduce dependence on volatile cryptocurrency markets, and implement governance mechanisms that maintain democratic legitimacy while ensuring effective decision-making.
成功嘅經濟模式需要喺自主性同融入現有金融體系之間取得平衡。最可持續嘅做法會喺符合法律框架下，為參與者提供實質經濟價值，同時多元化收入來源，減少對波動性強嘅加密貨幣市場依賴，亦會制定治理機制，確保有民主管理正當性同決策效率。
Geopolitical implications and future scenarios
Network states challenge fundamental assumptions about sovereignty, territorial control, and international relations that have defined the global political system since the 1648 Peace of Westphalia. Understanding their geopolitical implications requires examining both their potential to complement existing systems and their capacity to create new forms of political organization that transcend traditional borders.
網絡國家挑戰咗自1648年《威斯特伐利亞和約》以嚟界定全球政治體系嘅主權、領土控制同國際關係等基本假設。理解其地緣政治影響，要同時檢視佢哋有冇能力補足現有制度，亦或創造跨越傳統邊界嘅新政治組織形態。
The sovereignty challenge operates on multiple levels. Blockchain's distributed authority structure fundamentally conflicts with traditional concepts of singular sovereign control over defined territories. Network states' cross-border nature complicates jurisdiction and enforcement mechanisms designed for territorial entities, while their potential for bypassing existing legal and regulatory frameworks raises concerns about "state capture" by private interests with sufficient resources to establish alternative governance systems.
主權嘅挑戰係多層次嘅。區塊鏈分散式權力架構，基本上同傳統針對明確領土單一主權控制概念起衝突。網絡國家跨國界特性，複雜化咗原本為領土實體設計嘅司法同執法機制，而其繞過現有法律、監管架構嘅潛力，亦令人擔心有實力嘅私人利益團體可以進行「國家俘虜」，建立替代性治理系統。
Government responses reveal the ideological and practical tensions these innovations create. Authoritarian regimes like China and Russia have implemented comprehensive digital sovereignty frameworks including expanded internet restrictions, cryptocurrency bans, and surveillance systems designed to maintain state control over digital communities. China's "great firewall" and social credit system represent comprehensive attempts to subordinate digital networks to state authority, while Russia's internet restriction laws aim to create sovereign digital spaces insulated from external influence.
各國政府嘅反應展現咗呢啲創新帶嚟嘅理念同實踐矛盾。中國、俄羅斯等威權政體就建構咗全方位數碼主權框架，包括加強網絡管控、禁用加密貨幣及推行監控系統，以確保國家對數碼社群掌控。中國嘅「防火長城」同社會信用體系就係想將網絡全面納入國家權力之下；而俄羅斯嘅網絡限制法例則意在建立受外部影響隔離嘅主權數碼空間。
Democratic systems are pursuing more nuanced approaches that balance innovation encouragement with regulatory oversight. The European Union's General Data Protection Regulation and digital sovereignty initiatives attempt to maintain citizen privacy while preserving state authority over digital governance. The EU-US Trade and Technology Council represents collaborative frameworks for managing technological innovation within existing institutional structures.
民主體系則採用更細緻平衡嘅策略，鼓勵創新同時加強監管。歐盟通用數據保護條例同數字主權措施，致力喺保障市民私隱同保持國家對數碼治理權力之間平衡。歐盟－美國貿易及科技理事會則建立咗協作架構，希望喺現有制度下管理科技創新。
The United States presents perhaps the most complex response, with federal regulators taking aggressive enforcement positions against decentralized governance while individual states like Wyoming experiment with DAO-friendly legislation. This federal-state tension reflects broader questions about how existing constitutional and legal frameworks can accommodate governance innovations that transcend traditional jurisdictional boundaries.
美國回應可能最為複雜，聯邦監管機構對去中心化治理採取嚴厲執法，而懷俄明州等部分州份則嘗試推動有利DAO（去中心化自治組織）立法。 聯邦與州之間呢種張力，反映咗一個更深層問題：現有憲法同法律架構可否容納跨越傳統司法界線嘅治理創新。
International institutional adaptation faces significant challenges. Current international law and diplomatic frameworks assume territorial states with clear boundaries and hierarchical authority structures. Network states operate through distributed networks with fluid membership and voluntary association principles that existing treaties and international organizations struggle to address.
國際機構要適應亦面臨重大困難。現時國際法同外交框架以有清晰界線、等級分明嘅領土國家為假設前提。但網絡國家運作模式係分散式網絡、會員流動自願組成，現存條約同國際組織都難以應對。
The United Nations system, World Trade Organization, and other multilateral institutions lack frameworks for engaging with non-territorial political entities that may represent millions of participants across multiple jurisdictions. Traditional concepts of diplomatic immunity, state responsibility, and international legal personality require fundamental reconceptualization to address governance networks that exist primarily in digital spaces.
聯合國、世界貿易組織同其他多邊機構，並無機制處理橫跨多個司法管轄、可能有數以百萬計參與者嘅非領土政治實體。傳統如外交豁免權、國家責任、國際法人地位等概念，都要重新構思，先可以應對主要存在於數碼空間嘅治理網絡。
Migration patterns may shift significantly as network states provide alternatives to traditional citizenship and residency arrangements. Digital nomadism facilitated by network state infrastructure enables new forms of economic migration where individuals can maintain civic participation and identity while moving freely across territorial boundaries. This could accelerate brain drain from restrictive jurisdictions while creating new competitive pressures for governance innovation.
有咗網絡國家可作為傳統國籍同居留制度嘅替代方案，人口遷移模式可能會大幅改變。網絡國家基礎設施推動嘅數碼遊牧主義，令個人可以自由跨越邊界活動之餘，仍然能參與公民社會同保持身份認同。呢種轉變可能加速嚴格司法區人才外流，同時為治理創新帶嚟新競爭壓力。
Regulatory competition intensifies as network states provide exit options for citizens dissatisfied with traditional government services. Small nations have particular incentives to attract digital residents and their associated economic activity, as demonstrated by Estonia's success in capturing significant startup activity through its e-Residency program. This competition could drive beneficial governance innovation, but also risks regulatory fragmentation that complicates international cooperation.
有咗網絡國家，對傳統政府服務唔滿意嘅市民多咗退出選擇，令監管競爭更激烈。細國家如愛沙尼亞，靠電子居留計劃吸引大量初創活動，從而得益；小國對吸納數碼居民同經濟活動特別有動力。 呢種競爭固然可以推動有利治理創新，但亦有機會導致監管分化，增加國際合作複雜性。
The economic implications extend beyond individual network state success to systemic effects on global governance patterns. Tax competition may intensify as digital citizens gain mobility, potentially undermining public finance in high-tax jurisdictions while benefiting jurisdictions that offer attractive packages of digital services and regulatory frameworks.
經濟層面影響唔止於單一網絡國家成敗，更會塑造全球治理格局。隨住數碼公民流動性提升，稅務競爭有可能加劇，令高稅區財政出現壓力，而提供優質數碼服務配套同有利監管環境嘅地區則可能得益。
Scenario analysis reveals multiple possible development paths. An optimistic cooperative coexistence scenario sees network states complementing rather than replacing nation-states, with regulatory harmonization through international cooperation enabling innovation in public goods funding and governance while enhancing citizen choice and service quality. This scenario requires substantial adaptation of existing institutions and international law, but could produce significant efficiency gains through competitive governance and reduced transaction costs for cross-border activities.
情景分析顯示，有多種可能發展路徑。最樂觀嘅合作共存情景，係網絡國家並非取代民族國家，而係予以補足，透過國際合作令監管協調，鼓勵公共產品資金及治理創新，提升市民選擇同服務質素。要實現呢個情景須大量改革現有制度同國際法，但有機會因競爭性治理同跨境活動降低交易成本，帶嚟重大效率提升。
A pessimistic fragmentation scenario involves escalating sovereignty conflicts and legal battles, regulatory fragmentation that hampers interoperability, wealth concentration expanding digital divides, and authoritarian backlash against digital autonomy. This path could produce market fragmentation reducing efficiency gains, regulatory uncertainty deterring investment, tax avoidance undermining public finance, and systemic risks from unregulated digital systems.
悲觀分裂情景下，主權衝突及法律爭拗加劇，監管分化阻礙互通，財富集中擴大數碼鴻溝，威權政體反撲數碼自治。呢個走向會導致市場分裂、效率提升有限，監管不明朗阻礙投資，逃稅蠶食財政，無監管數碼系統帶來系統性風險。
The most likely balanced scenario involves gradual integration of network state innovations within existing frameworks through incremental adoption of beneficial mechanisms, regulatory adaptation maintaining core sovereign functions, selective implementation of proven governance innovations, and international cooperation on digital governance standards. This evolution would produce moderate efficiency gains from governance innovation while maintaining managed competition between jurisdictions and gradually expanding digital public services through balanced taxation and regulation approaches.
最有可能出現嘅平衡情景，則係網絡國家創新逐步融入現有制度，逐步引入有效機制，監管上既保有核心主權功能，同時選擇性引入證明有效嘅治理創新，再配合國際合作制訂數碼治理標準。呢種演變可透過治理創新帶來適度效率提升，在監管競爭受控下，逐步擴大數碼公共服務，靠稅收與規管保持平衡。
Critical uncertainties affecting scenario development include the pace of technological advancement in blockchain scalability and user experience, the extent of international coordination on digital governance standards, the success of existing network state experiments in demonstrating practical value, and the ability of traditional institutions to adapt governance innovations without losing core legitimacy.
影響情景發展嘅重大不確定性，包括區塊鏈可擴展性及用戶體驗嘅技術進展速度、國際間協調數碼治理標準嘅深度、現有網絡國家能否有效展示實用價值，以及傳統機構是否可以繼續適應治理創新而不失核心正當性。
The geopolitical future of network states likely depends on their ability to demonstrate complementary rather than competitive relationships with existing nation-states. Success requires solving fundamental challenges of democratic legitimacy, regulatory compliance, and practical value delivery while contributing to rather than undermining international stability and cooperation.
網絡國家地緣政治未來，很大程度取決於能否證明自己可同民族國家互補而非對抗。若要成功，必須解決民主管理正當性、依法合規、實際價值落地等根本問題，並應該支援而非擾亂國際穩定與協作。
The stakes extend beyond governance innovation to questions about the future of human political organization in an increasingly digital world. Network states represent one response to perceived failures in traditional democratic and institutional systems, but their ultimate impact will depend on their capacity to address real human needs while maintaining social cohesion and collective action capabilities that effective governance requires.
呢場討論唔止係治理創新，而係關於數碼世界日益主導下，人類如何進行政治組織。網絡國家係對傳統民主與制度失效感嘅一種回應，但最終影響會取決於佢哋有冇能力解決人類實際需要，同時維繫社會凝聚力同集體行動，達致有效治理。
Challenges, limitations, and critical analysis
Despite significant innovation and investment, network states face substantial challenges that may limit their practical implementation and effectiveness as alternatives to traditional governance systems. A realistic assessment requires examining these limitations alongside their potential benefits.
儘管網絡國家有唔少創新和資本投入，佢哋依然面對好多重大挑戰，可能會限制其實際落地同作為傳統治理替代方案嘅效能。務實評估必須同時檢視這啲限制及其潛在好處。
Participation and democratic legitimacy present the most fundamental challenges. Across major DAO implementations, governance participation typically ranges from 5-15% of token holders, with meaningful decisions often determined by 350-500 active voters. This participation rate is significantly lower than traditional democratic systems, raising questions about the legitimacy of governance decisions affecting thousands or millions of participants.
參與率同民主管理正當性係最根本嘅問題。主流DAO項目中，參與治理投票嘅通常只佔持幣人士5-15%，重大決策好多時只係350至500個活躍用戶決定。呢個參與率遠低於傳統民主制度，令人質疑影響幾千甚至幾百萬人成員嘅治理決策，係唔係真有正當性。
Power concentration compounds these concerns, with the most active 10% of voters controlling 76.2% of voting power in major DAOs like Uniswap. Token-weighted governance naturally favors wealthy participants who can afford larger stakes, potentially creating plutocratic systems where economic inequality
權力集中令問題更加嚴重。例如Uniswap等大型DAO，最活躍10%投票者掌控咗76.2%投票權重。按持幣數決定投票權勢，天生就偏向財力雄厚嘅參與者，容易變成財閥統治，令經濟不平等問題更加突出。translates directly into political influence. Early adopter advantages in token distribution exacerbate these dynamics, as founding teams and initial investors often retain disproportionate governance control.
直接轉化為政治影響力。早期採用者在代幣分配上的優勢加劇了這種情況，創辦團隊和初始投資者往往持有不成比例的治理控制權。
The quarterly decline of 15% in voter participation without active engagement strategies demonstrates the difficulty of maintaining sustained democratic engagement in digital communities. Unlike territorial democracies where geographic proximity and shared infrastructure create natural incentives for civic participation, network states must artificially generate the social solidarity necessary for collective action.
沒有積極參與策略下，投票率每個季度下跌15%，反映出在數碼社群中維持持續民主參與的困難。與地區民主國家不同，地理接近和共享基建會自然激勵公民參與，但網絡國必須人為製造進行集體行動所需的社會凝聚力。
Technical barriers exclude many potential participants from meaningful governance engagement. Wallet management, transaction signing, proposal evaluation, and smart contract interaction require technical sophistication that remains beyond most internet users' capabilities. Gas fees create additional participation barriers, with voting costs of $50-500 per proposal on Ethereum mainnet effectively excluding smaller stakeholders from governance processes.
技術門檻令許多潛在參與者無法參與有意義的治理。錢包管理、交易簽署、提案評估、智能合約互動都需要技術熟練度，這些仍然超越大部分網民的能力。Gas費用更構成額外障礙，以太坊主網每個提案的投票成本高達50至500美元，實際上排除了小型持份者參與治理。
User experience complexity extends beyond individual transactions to the broader cognitive load of participating in multiple governance systems, tracking proposal developments, evaluating technical changes, and understanding complex tokenomic mechanisms. These barriers may inherently limit network state participation to technically sophisticated early adopters rather than enabling broad-based democratic participation.
用戶體驗的複雜性不限於單次交易，更包含同時參與多個治理系統、跟進提案進度、評估技術變更、理解複雜的代幣經濟機制所帶來的認知負擔。這些障礙可能本質上限制網絡國只由懂技術的早期採用者參與，未能實現普及的民主參與。
Scalability challenges operate across multiple dimensions. Blockchain infrastructure limitations constrain transaction throughput to 15-50 transactions per second for major governance platforms, while energy consumption concerns affect proof-of-work systems' long-term viability. Although Layer 2 solutions provide significant cost reductions, they add complexity that may worsen user experience problems.
擴展性挑戰存在於多個層面。區塊鏈基礎設施的限制令主流治理平台的交易量只能達到每秒15至50筆，而能耗問題影響著工作量證明系統的長遠可行性。雖然Layer 2方案大幅降低成本，但同時增加複雜度，可能令用戶體驗問題加劇。
Governance scalability may prove even more challenging than technical scalability. Small communities can achieve consensus through informal coordination mechanisms that become unwieldy at scale. Network states must develop institutional structures capable of coordinating millions of participants while maintaining decentralization principles, but existing proposals remain largely untested at population scales.
治理層面的可擴展性，甚至可能比技術可擴展性更具挑戰。小社區可以用非正式協調方式達成共識，但一到大規模就難以運作。網絡國要建立能協調百萬人參與、同時維持去中心化原則的制度結構，但現有方案在大規模人群下幾乎未經測試。
Security vulnerabilities create existential risks for blockchain-based governance systems. Flash loan attacks enable temporary token acquisition for governance manipulation, as demonstrated by various DeFi protocol exploits. Oracle manipulation can affect governance decisions depending on external price feeds, while smart contract vulnerabilities like reentrancy bugs can enable attackers to drain treasuries or manipulate voting outcomes.
安全漏洞對區塊鏈治理構成生存風險。閃電貸攻擊可令惡意者臨時獲取大量權益操控治理，DeFi協議多有此類前科。預言機遭操控會影響依賴外部數據的治理決策，智能合約漏洞如可重入bug則可被用來盜取庫房、干預投票結果。
The 2022 Ooki DAO enforcement action by the CFTC demonstrates how regulatory attacks can target governance participants directly, making all token holders potentially liable for regulatory violations regardless of their knowledge or intent. This creates strong disincentives for participation that could undermine the distributed decision-making networks states require.
美國商品期貨交易委員會於2022年對 Ooki DAO 的執法行動，顯示監管機構可以直接針對治理參與者，即使持幣者不知情或無意圖，也可能負上法律責任。這會形成強烈的參與阻嚇，削弱網絡國需要的分散式決策網絡。
Economic sustainability remains unproven for most network state experiments. While Estonia's e-Residency program demonstrates clear economic success with €244 million in impact and 7.6:1 ROI, most DAO treasuries show negative performance metrics requiring strategic reassessment. Concentration in native tokens creates dangerous feedback loops where governance decisions affecting token value directly impact operational funding.
大多數網絡國實驗的經濟可持續性仍未證明成立。愛沙尼亞 e-Residency 項目在經濟上明顯成功（帶來2.44億歐元效益，投資回報率7.6倍），但多數DAO的財庫往績則見負數，需要策略重整。大量持有原生代幣造成危險的反饋循環——治理決策影響代幣價格，直接衝擊營運資金。
Market dependence on cryptocurrency cycles affects both treasury stability and governance participation, as token price volatility influences stakeholder engagement. Limited revenue diversification across most projects creates sustainability risks that may prevent network states from providing reliable services over extended periods.
市場高度受加密貨幣週期所影響，導致財庫不穩和治理參與波動，因代幣價格起落會左右持份者的投入度。多數項目缺乏收入多元化，構成可持續性的風險，未必能長期提供可靠服務。
Legal and regulatory uncertainty undermines long-term planning and investment. The fragmented international regulatory landscape creates compliance complexity that may be insurmountable for truly global governance networks. Different jurisdictions' conflicting approaches to securities law, taxation, privacy regulation, and AML requirements create legal impossibilities where compliance with one framework violates another.
法律和監管的不確定性，破壞長遠規劃和投資意欲。國際監管格局支離破碎，為真正全球化的治理網絡帶來難以逾越的合規複雜度。不同地區在證券、稅務、私隱及反洗錢法的規管出現矛盾，有時甚至出現「遵守一邊就違反另一邊」的法律困境。
The absence of clear pathways to diplomatic recognition means network states operate in legal gray areas where traditional legal remedies may be unavailable and international law provides no protection. This uncertainty makes it difficult to attract institutional participation or build the stable institutions that effective governance requires.
缺乏明確獲得外交承認的途徑，即是說網絡國長期處於法律灰色地帶，傳統的法律救濟未必適用，國際法亦未能保障。這種不確定性拖慢機構參與，甚至難以搭建行政穩定、有效治理所需的機構安排。
Social and cultural integration challenges may prove insurmountable for achieving the social solidarity necessary for collective action. Network states lack the shared history, cultural traditions, and physical proximity that help traditional communities resolve disputes and coordinate collective action. Pure economic incentives may be insufficient to generate the trust and mutual commitment that stable political systems require.
社會和文化融合的困難，可能令建立集體行動時的社會凝聚力變得遙不可及。網絡國缺乏共同歷史、文化傳承和實體鄰近這些協助傳統社群解決爭議和協同行動的有利因素。純粹靠經濟誘因，未必足以締造穩定政治體制所需的信任和互相承擔。
The emphasis on "exit" over "voice" as a conflict resolution mechanism may prevent network states from developing the institutional capabilities necessary to address internal disagreements and adapt to changing circumstances. While exit enables individual optimization, complex collective action problems require institutions capable of mediating between competing interests and building consensus around shared goals.
偏重「退出」而非「發聲」作為解決爭議手段，可能令網絡國沒法建立解決內部分歧、應對外變的制度能力。退出固然促成個人利益最大化，但複雜的集體行動問題，需要能媒介不同利益、凝聚共同目標共識的制度。
Inequality and accessibility concerns extend beyond simple wealth distribution to fundamental questions about digital inclusion. Network states may exacerbate global inequalities by providing superior governance and economic opportunities to technically sophisticated, globally mobile individuals while leaving others subject to potentially deteriorating traditional institutions.
不平等和可及性的問題，不僅止於財富分配，而是觸及數碼共融的根本問題。網絡國有機會加劇全球不平等——懂技術、全球流動力高的人可享高質治理和經濟機會，其他人則只剩下日益退化的傳統體制。
Internet access, smartphone penetration, financial system integration, and educational prerequisites for crypto-literacy remain significant barriers in developing countries where network state alternatives might provide the greatest benefits. Without addressing these digital divides, network states risk becoming exclusive clubs for globally mobile elites rather than inclusive governance innovations.
網絡連接、手機普及、金融體系整合及加密素養教育，在有需要網絡國替代方案的發展中國家仍是重大障礙。這些數碼鴻溝若不解決，網絡國只會淪為全球流動精英的專屬俱樂部，難成全民共融的治理創新。
The risk of creating parallel governance systems that avoid rather than solve collective action problems represents perhaps the greatest limitation. If network states primarily attract wealthy, technically sophisticated individuals seeking to avoid traditional civic obligations like taxation and regulation, they may undermine rather than improve overall governance quality by removing resources and talent from traditional democratic systems.
建立平行治理系統，只是規避並無法解決集體行動問題，這很可能是最大限制。如果網絡國主要吸引有錢又懂技術、只為逃避納稅和監管的族群，這未必提升整體治理質素，反而有機會抽走傳統民主體系中的資源和人才。
Critical analysis suggests that network states face a fundamental tension between their ideological commitment to voluntary association and the practical requirements of effective governance. The most successful current implementations like Estonia's e-Residency program operate within traditional institutional frameworks rather than replacing them, while purely blockchain-based governance experiments struggle with participation, legitimacy, and sustainability challenges.
批判分析顯示，網絡國在理念上主張自願結社，但實際有效治理卻有基本張力。像愛沙尼亞e-Residency這類最成功案例，仍然是在傳統制度結構下運作而非完全取而代之。純區塊鏈治理實驗則在參與度、合法性和可持續性方面持續碰壁。
The future viability of network states likely depends on their ability to solve these fundamental challenges rather than simply providing technically elegant solutions to governance problems. This may require compromising core principles of decentralization and voluntariness in favor of more traditional institutional structures that can achieve the scale, stability, and inclusiveness that effective governance requires.
網絡國未來的可行性，很可能取決於是否能解決以上根本性挑戰，而不僅僅是用技術上漂亮的辦法包裝治理問題。這或需對去中心化和自願性等核心理念作出讓步，以便構建更符合傳統制度的架構，實現有效治理所需的規模、穩定性和包容性。
Future of digital governance and network states
The evolution of network states will likely be determined by their capacity to solve fundamental governance challenges while adapting to regulatory, technological, and social constraints that limit pure implementations of their theoretical ideals. Evidence from current experiments suggests a future characterized by hybrid models that blend network state innovations with traditional institutional frameworks rather than wholesale replacement of existing systems.
網絡國演進的關鍵，將會在於是否有能力解決根本治理難題，同時能適應限制其純理想型實踐的監管、技術和社會現實限制。現時種種實驗結果都顯示，未來更可能是結合網絡國創新和傳統制度的「混合模式」，而非完全取代現有體制。
Technological developments will significantly influence implementation possibilities. Emerging Layer 2 scaling solutions and cross-chain interoperability protocols are addressing current blockchain limitations that constrain governance participation and increase transaction costs. Zero-knowledge proof technologies may enable privacy-preserving governance that protects participant identity while maintaining system integrity, potentially addressing current surveillance and regulatory concerns.
科技進展會大大影響未來的落地可能。新興Layer 2擴容方案和跨鏈協定正針對限制治理參與及加重成本的區塊鏈問題作出回應。零知識證明有望實現保護參與者身份、兼顧系統公正的保私治理，有望補足現時監控及監管疑慮。
Artificial intelligence integration could automate routine governance decisions while flagging complex issues requiring human deliberation, potentially solving the participation burden that limits democratic engagement in current DAO systems. However, AI-assisted governance raises new questions about algorithmic accountability and the preservation of human agency in political decision-making.
人工智能技術可自動化常規治理決策，同時將複雜議題交由人類深思熟慮，有機會解決DAO現時民主參與的「參與負擔」。但AI協助治理亦會帶來演算法問責、新型政治決策中如何維護人類自主性的疑問。
User experience improvements through account abstraction, gasless transactions, and simplified wallet interfaces may broaden participation beyond current technical barriers, though fundamental questions about cognitive load and civic engagement remain. The successful implementation of these technologies could determine whether network states remain niche experiments or achieve mainstream adoption.
經由賬戶抽象、免gas交易、簡化錢包介面等提升用戶體驗的方式，有機會突破現有技術門檻，令更多人參與。不過，關於認知負擔和公民參與的根本問題仍未解決。這些技術如能成功落實，或決定網絡國會否止步於小眾實驗還是獲得主流認同。
Regulatory evolution appears likely to create clearer frameworks rather than wholesale prohibition. The gradual development of DAO-specific legislation in jurisdictions like Wyoming, combined with regulatory sandboxes and international coordination efforts, suggests movement toward accommodation rather than suppression. However, this accommodation will likely require network states to compromise pure decentralization in favor of hybrid structures that enable regulatory compliance.
監管發展趨勢似乎是建立更明確指引而非全面禁止。例如懷俄明州推出DAO專屬立法，結合監管沙盒及國際協調舉措，反映政策方向較傾向容納創新而非壓制。不過，要配合監管的容納，網絡國大概需要在去中心化原則上讓步，採用更易合規的混合結構。
The emergence of 【原文未完】Central Bank Digital Currencies (CBDCs) represents a potential competitive response to network state currency innovations, offering government-backed digital payment systems with programmable features that could integrate with traditional governance structures. CBDCs may provide the benefits of digital currencies while maintaining state control over monetary policy and financial system oversight.
中央銀行數碼貨幣（CBDC）被視為對網絡國家貨幣創新的一種潛在競爭性回應，提供背靠政府的數碼支付系統，並具備可編程功能，有機會與傳統治理架構融合。CBDC有望讓國家在保持對貨幣政策和金融系統監管主導下，帶來數碼貨幣的種種優點。
International institutional adaptation will likely be gradual and partial. Rather than creating entirely new frameworks for network state recognition, existing institutions may develop mechanisms for engaging with digital governance networks on specific issues while maintaining traditional interstate relations for core sovereignty functions.
國際制度適應很可能會是漸進且局部的。與其完全建立全新框架以承認網絡國家，現有機構更可能針對特定議題設計機制，與數碼治理網絡互動，同時在核心主權功能上維持傳統的國與國之間關係。
The development of technical standards for cross-border digital governance, similar to internet protocol standards, could enable interoperability between network states and traditional systems without requiring formal diplomatic recognition. This approach would allow network states to provide services to their participants while operating within existing international legal frameworks.
建立類似互聯網協議標準的跨境數碼治理技術標準，有望提升網絡國家與傳統系統之間的互通性，而無須正式承認外交地位。這種做法可以讓網絡國家在現有國際法律框架下，為其參與者提供服務。
Economic integration patterns suggest network states will complement rather than replace traditional economic systems. The success of Estonia's e-Residency in attracting EU business activity demonstrates how digital governance can enhance rather than bypass traditional economic frameworks. Similarly, the most successful DAO governance experiments manage assets within existing financial systems rather than creating parallel economies.
經濟融合模式顯示，網絡國家會補充而非取代傳統經濟體系。愛沙尼亞電子居留權在吸引歐盟商業活動方面取得成功，證明數碼治理能提升而非繞過傳統經濟架構。同樣，最成功的DAO治理實驗都是在現有金融系統內管理資產，而不是建立平行經濟。
Future development will likely emphasize specific functional areas where network states provide clear advantages - such as cross-border coordination for digital nomads, specialized governance for technical communities, or efficient public goods funding mechanisms - rather than attempting comprehensive alternative governance systems.
未來發展預計會聚焦於網絡國家有明顯優勢的具體功能範疇，例如：為數碼遊牧族提供跨境協調、為技術社群提供專門治理，或推動高效公共品資助機制，而不是試圖建立全面性替代治理系統。
Social and political evolution may determine ultimate viability more than technological capabilities. Network states' emphasis on voluntary association and exit rights appeals to individuals dissatisfied with traditional democratic outcomes, but the sustainability of communities organized primarily around shared dissatisfaction remains unclear.
社會及政治演變對網絡國家最終能否可行的影響，可能比技術能力更大。網絡國家強調自願參與及退出權，吸引對傳統民主結果不滿的人，但以共同不滿作為組織基礎的社群能否持續存在，仍屬未知之數。
Successful network states may need to develop stronger mechanisms for generating social solidarity and collective identity that transcend economic incentives. This could involve incorporating elements of traditional civic institutions, cultural practices, and shared physical experiences that current implementations largely avoid.
成功的網絡國家或需要建立更有力的社會團結與集體身份機制，超越經濟誘因。這可能包括吸納傳統公民機構、文化實踐及共同實體經驗等元素，而這些是現時方案普遍未能顧及的部分。
The global trend toward political polarization and institutional distrust that creates demand for network state alternatives also poses risks for their development. If network states become primarily vehicles for political or cultural separation rather than governance innovation, they may contribute to social fragmentation rather than solving collective action problems.
全球政治兩極化及機構失信的趨勢，雖然催生對網絡國家作為替代方案的需求，但亦為其發展帶來風險。如果網絡國家淪為政治或文化分離的工具，而非治理創新，那麼結果可能只是加深社會分化，未能真正解決集體行動問題。
Multiple development scenarios remain plausible based on current evidence. A maximalist scenario sees network states achieving diplomatic recognition and operating as genuine alternatives to traditional nation-states, enabled by technological breakthroughs in scalability and user experience combined with regulatory acceptance and successful demonstration of governance effectiveness at scale.
現有證據下，存在多種可能的發展路徑。一個極致願景是，網絡國家獲得外交承認，並以真正的國家替代者角色運作——這需要技術在可擴展性和用戶體驗上取得重大突破，還要有監管接受和成功展示大規模治理效能。
A minimalist scenario sees network state concepts being gradually absorbed into traditional institutions through digital governance innovations, regulatory frameworks for cross-border coordination, and hybrid public-private service delivery models that capture efficiency benefits without challenging fundamental sovereignty concepts.
最低限度的願景則是，網絡國家理念逐步被傳統機構吸收，包括數碼治理創新、跨境協調的監管框架，以及公私混合服務型態，從而享有效率提升，而毋需挑戰根本主權概念。
The most likely moderate scenario involves network states occupying specific niches within the broader governance ecosystem - providing services for globally mobile individuals, coordinating specialized technical communities, managing digital assets and public goods funding, and enabling experimentation with governance innovations that may eventually be adopted by traditional institutions.
最有可能的中庸情境，是網絡國家於更廣泛的治理生態圈中佔據特定利基——為環球流動個體提供服務、協調專門技術社群、管理數碼資產及公共物品資助，並推動治理創新實驗，讓傳統機構有機會最終採納。
Critical success factors for any scenario include solving participation and legitimacy challenges through inclusive governance mechanisms, developing sustainable economic models that don't depend on speculative token appreciation, achieving regulatory compliance that enables stable long-term operation, and demonstrating concrete value delivery that justifies the complexity and uncertainty of participation.
無論哪種發展情境，能否成功關鍵在於：以包容性治理機制解決參與及合法性困難，發展不依賴投機代幣升值的可持續經濟模式，滿足穩定長遠運作的合規要求，以及落實具體價值回報，以回應參與網絡國家帶來的複雜性和不確定性。
The future of network states ultimately depends on their capacity to contribute to human flourishing through improved governance rather than simply providing alternatives for dissatisfied elites. This requires balancing innovation with inclusion, efficiency with legitimacy, and autonomy with integration into existing systems that serve broader populations.
網絡國家的未來，歸根究底視乎其能否透過更好的治理促進人類福祉，而不只是為不滿現狀的精英提供另一選擇。這需要在創新與包容、效率與合法性、自治與現有制度融合之間取得平衡，惠及更廣泛的群體。
Evidence suggests that the most successful implementations will be those that enhance rather than replace existing governance capabilities, providing specialized services and innovations that complement traditional institutions while addressing genuine governance challenges. The purely revolutionary vision of network states replacing nation-states seems less likely than evolutionary adaptation that incorporates their innovations into hybrid governance models capable of serving diverse populations at scale.
現有證據顯示，最成功的案例都是提升而非取代現有治理能力，即提供補足傳統機構的專門服務及創新，並切實解決治理難題。網絡國家完全取代主權國家的革命式願景，遠不及其創新漸進融入混合治理模式的演變式途徑來得可行，後者才更有機會服務多元人口的大規模需求。
The network state concept has already contributed valuable innovations in digital governance, decentralized coordination, and public goods funding that will likely persist regardless of whether full network states achieve recognition. These contributions may prove more significant than the creation of alternative sovereign entities, particularly if they enhance the effectiveness and responsiveness of traditional democratic institutions.
網絡國家理念已經為數碼治理、去中心化協作及公共物品資助，帶來了持久的創新貢獻，無論網絡國家能否最終獲得國際承認都會存在。這些創新或許比另起爐灶建立新一套主權體系意義更大，尤其若能有效提升傳統民主制度的效能與回應度。
Final thoughts
Network states represent one of the most ambitious attempts to reimagine human political organization for the digital age, synthesizing decades of technological innovation with fundamental insights about voluntary association, spontaneous order, and competitive governance. From Balaji Srinivasan's theoretical framework to Estonia's e-Residency success generating €244 million in economic impact, from Praxis Society's $525 million in funding to the complex realities of DAO governance managing billions in assets, the landscape reveals both significant promise and substantial challenges.
網絡國家是數碼時代對人類政治組織最雄心勃勃的重塑之一，結合了數十年技術創新，以及有關自願結社、自發秩序及競爭性治理的基本洞見。由Balaji Srinivasan提出的理論框架，到愛沙尼亞電子居留創造2.44億歐元經濟影響的成功案列，從Praxis Society融資5.25億美元，到DAO治理實際操作下管理數十億資產的複雜現實，這一切都展現了巨大潛力與不少挑戰。
The theoretical foundations draw compelling insights from exit-based political philosophy, Austrian economics, and cypherpunk technological vision, offering genuinely innovative approaches to persistent governance problems. The technical infrastructure demonstrates impressive sophistication through decentralized identity systems, programmable smart contract governance, and privacy-preserving voting mechanisms that enable coordination impossible through traditional institutional means.
其理論基礎吸收了以退出權為本的政治哲學、奧地利學派經濟理論，以及密碼龐克的技術願景，為長期存在的治理難題帶來嶄新解決路徑。技術基建方面，去中心化身份系統、可編程智能合約治理，以及保障私隱的投票機制，令協作可達到傳統制度難以想像的水平。
Current implementations provide crucial evidence about both possibilities and limitations. Estonia's e-Residency program proves digital citizenship can generate substantial economic value while enhancing service delivery, with 126,500 participants creating 36,000 companies and achieving 7.6:1 return on investment. Major DAO governance systems successfully coordinate complex financial decisions across global communities, managing treasury assets worth billions while maintaining transparency and programmable execution.
現時的落地實踐亦帶來重要證據，揭示可能性及限制。愛沙尼亞電子居留計劃證明，數碼公民身份既可增值經濟又能提升服務效率——12.65萬人創立3.6萬間公司，投資回報率達7.6比1。主要DAO治理系統橫跨全球社群，協調複雜的財政決策，有效管理價值數十億的資產，同時保持高度透明度及可編程執行力。
However, persistent challenges reveal fundamental tensions between network state ideals and practical governance requirements. Participation rates of 5-15% in major DAO governance systems raise serious questions about democratic legitimacy, while power concentration among wealthy token holders creates plutocratic tendencies that conflict with inclusive governance principles. Technical barriers, regulatory uncertainty, and sustainability concerns limit implementations to sophisticated early adopters rather than enabling broad-based participation.
然而，現實中持續浮現的挑戰暴露了網絡國家理想與實際治理需求之間的根本矛盾。主流DAO治理的參與率僅得5-15%，令民主合法性成疑；財富集中於少數大戶手中，產生寡頭化傾向，偏離原有包容性治理原則。技術門檻、法規不明朗和可持續性問題，使參與局限於小部分精英用戶，未能全面普及。
The regulatory landscape presents complex challenges as governments struggle to address governance innovations that transcend traditional jurisdictional boundaries. While some jurisdictions like Switzerland and Wyoming develop accommodating frameworks, major regulators like the SEC and CFTC take aggressive enforcement positions that threaten decentralized governance experimentation. International coordination remains limited, creating compliance impossibilities for truly global networks.
監管形勢亦極為複雜，各地政府難以應對超越傳統管轄界限的治理創新。部分地區如瑞士、懷俄明州制訂友好框架，但大型監管機構如美國證監會（SEC）、商品期貨交易委員會（CFTC）卻採取高壓執法策略，威脅去中心化治理的試驗。國際協調十分有限，令真正全球性的網絡很難合法合規。
Economic analysis reveals both innovative potential and sustainability concerns. Public goods funding mechanisms like quadratic funding and retroactive funding demonstrate mathematically optimal approaches to democratic resource allocation, while governance token systems create novel incentive alignments between individual and collective interests. However, treasury management challenges, market volatility dependence, and wealth concentration patterns raise questions about long-term viability.
經濟層面的分析既展現創新潛力，也暴露可持續風險。諸如二次方資助、回溯資助等公共品資助機制，帶來數學上最優的民主管理資源分配，而治理代幣制度則促進個人與集體利益對齊。但資金庫管理難題、對市場波動的敏感和財富集中現象，卻為長遠可行性帶來疑問。
Geopolitical implications extend beyond governance innovation to fundamental questions about sovereignty, international relations, and democratic legitimacy in an increasingly connected world. Network states offer potential solutions to citizen mobility, regulatory competition, and cross-border coordination, but also create risks of fragmentation, inequality exacerbation, and democratic institution undermining.
地緣政治層面，網絡國家不僅帶來治理創新，也衝擊主權、國際關係及民主合法性等根本問題。網絡國家有機會為公民流動、監管競爭、跨境協調等提供方案，同時亦可能導致碎片化、加劇不平等和削弱民主機構。
The future likely involves evolution rather than revolution, with network state innovations being gradually incorporated into hybrid governance models that combine their efficiency benefits with traditional institutions' legitimacy, scale, and inclusiveness capabilities. The most successful implementations will probably be those that enhance rather than replace existing governance systems, providing specialized services for globally mobile individuals, coordinating technical communities, and enabling governance experimentation that benefits broader society.
未來走勢很可能是演變多於革命——網絡國家的創新逐步融入混合型治理模式，結合其效率優勢與傳統機構之合法性、規模和包容力。最成功的實踐應是提升而非取代現有治理體系，為流動性高的用戶、技術社群提供專業服務，推動社會受惠的治理創新。
Critical questions remain
關鍵問題仍然存在about whether network states can solve fundamental collective action problems or primarily serve as exit options for dissatisfied elites. Their ultimate contribution may lie less in creating alternative sovereign entities than in pioneering governance innovations - decentralized decision-making mechanisms, programmable institutional structures, and democratic funding systems - that enhance traditional institutions' effectiveness and responsiveness.
有關network states是否能夠解決根本性的集體行動問題，還是主要只為不滿現狀的精英階層提供「出路」選項。最終，它們的貢獻或許未必在於另創新的主權實體，而是在於推動治理創新，例如去中心化的決策機制、可編程的制度結構及民主化的集資方式，從而提升傳統機構的效能和回應能力。
The network state experiment continues, driven by genuine governance challenges and enabled by powerful technological capabilities. Success will depend on balancing innovation with inclusion, autonomy with integration, and efficiency with legitimacy. Whether network states achieve their revolutionary potential or contribute to evolutionary governance improvement, they have already demonstrated the possibility of reimagining how human communities organize themselves in ways that may prove essential for addressing global challenges requiring unprecedented coordination across traditional institutional boundaries.
network state的實驗仍在繼續，一方面受到真正的治理挑戰推動，另一方面則得益於強大的科技能力。是否能取得成功，取決於如何平衡創新與包容、自主與融合，以及效率與合法性。無論network states最終能否實現革命性的潛力，還是僅僅推動了治理的漸進式改良，它們都已經展示了人類社群重新構想自我組織方式的可能性，而這種創新或許對應付所需跨越傳統體制界限、史無前例的全球協調挑戰至關重要。
The conversation about network states ultimately reflects deeper questions about human political organization, technological capability, and social solidarity in the 21st century. These experiments deserve serious attention not only for their potential to solve governance problems, but for what they reveal about the possibilities and limitations of voluntary association, competitive governance, and digital coordination in an increasingly complex and interconnected world.
有關network states的討論，最終反映出人類在21世紀政治組織、科技能力和社會凝聚力上的更深層次問題。這些實驗值得我們認真關注，不僅因為它們有望解決治理上的難題，更因為它們揭示了在這個越來越複雜和互聯的世界裏，自願組織、競爭治理及數碼協作的可能性與局限。