應用商店
錢包

什麼是網路國家?區塊鏈治理與數位公民模式解析

Kostiantyn TsentsuraSep, 06 2025 15:42
什麼是網路國家?區塊鏈治理與數位公民模式解析

以區塊鏈技術支撐、數位優先的治理結構來組織人類社會,這一概念已從賽博朋克的理想主義,演變成數十億美元資本投入的具體實驗。Network states 或稱網路國家,或許是重新想像在全球日益互聯背景下,社群如何組成、自主管理並與傳統民族國家互動的最具野心嘗試。

網路國家概念的主要推動者巴拉吉·斯里尼瓦桑(Balaji Srinivasan)定義其為「擁有高度共識、能集體行動、並以全球眾籌方式獲取土地,最終得到傳統國家外交承認的線上社群。」

這個看似簡單的定義,實則隱含著挑戰數位時代主權、公民身分與治理基本假設的複雜理論基礎。愛沙尼亞「電子居留」計畫,吸引逾 12 萬 6 千數位公民並創造 2.44 億歐元經濟效益,展現數位公民模式實際潛力;而如 Praxis Society 獲得 5.25 億美元融資的計畫,也反映了投資界對另類治理實驗的信心。

網路國家的崛起,體現了傳統領土主權與無國界數位社群之間的普遍緊張關係。當去中心化自治組織透過代幣治理管理數十億資產、特區實驗結合區塊鏈法律系統時,理論和實踐的界線越發模糊。

要理解網路國家,需探討其哲學根基、技術基礎、當下實驗、監管挑戰,以及對人類組織未來的潛在影響。

理論基礎與思想淵源

網路國家的概念 DNA,來自數十年科技與政治演進交匯出的多元思想傳統。最直接的哲學祖先,是艾伯特·赫希曼(Albert Hirschman)1970 年提出的「退出、發聲與忠誠」三分法,分析個人在組織衰敗或不滿時如何反應。傳統政治強調「發聲」——透過內部參與改變體制,網路國家則以「退出」作為政治變革的核心動能。

這種「退出」導向的理念可上溯至奧地利學派經濟學,尤以哈耶克(F.A. Hayek)的自發秩序理論為代表。哈耶克主張人類行動而非人類設計促成複雜協調,市場作為信息處理系統,比中央集權更能協調分散知識。網路國家將這一市場邏輯推向治理本身,把政治體制視為公民以腳投票——或以數位錢包、網絡參與——的競合市場。

1990 年代賽博朋克運動賦予這些理念具體技術遠景。蒂莫西·梅(Timothy May)的《密碼無政府主義宣言》與艾瑞克·休斯(Eric Hughes)「隱私是電子時代開放社會之必要」的主張,確立了以科技(非法律)捍衛個人自由的基礎原則。約翰·佩里·巴洛(John Perry Barlow)的《賽博空間獨立宣言》則大膽宣告網路世界將免於傳統主權約束,開創社會創新新領域。

2009 年比特幣問世,率先實踐賽博朋克原則,證明去中心化共識能在全球網絡協調行動,無需傳統機構背書。以太坊的智能合約更進一步提供可編程治理,為網路國所需複雜治理機制鋪墊技術基礎。

斯里尼瓦桑的創新在於「道德創新」概念的綜整,也就是網路國家以「外界視為不良」或恰恰相反的共同價值組織,如推崇「糖有害」健康社群、傳統宗教聚落或新生活型態實驗。道德創新具有多重功能:為分布式社群提供思想凝聚力、正當化獨立治理結構,並促發組建集體行動所需的目標感。

這一哲學架構明確排除傳統國家的領土基礎。民族國家「以土地為起點,配給人民於領土」;網路國家則「以思想為起點,吸引人們加入網絡」。這種「雲端優先、土地其後,但非永久不需土地」的數位優先作法,重新排序政治社群的組成與維繫邏輯。

批評者認為此框架反映出學界所稱「為第二輪資產新貴革命正名的文本」,即在跨國層面集中資本權利、而又以私有產權限制人性自由。民主理論學者則關注自願結社與普惠治理間的緊張關係,懷疑純數位社群是否真能孕育有效集體行動所需的社會認同。

技術基礎設施與治理機制

網路國家的科技基礎倚賴先進的區塊鏈設施,實現去中心化身分、可編程治理、及加密驗證的共識。理解這些系統要同時關注其現時能力與內在限制。

去中心化身分系統乃數位公民身份的根基。萬維網協會(W3C)提出的去中心化身分識別(DIDs)標準,賦予用戶能在不依賴中心化機構下自主管理全球唯一標識。加上可驗證憑證後,技術架構師稱此為「自主主權身分」——讓個人離開傳統機構獨立管理其身分證明權限。

真實案例顯示其實用潛力。歐盟區塊鏈服務基礎設施可簽發如數位文憑、社會保障等官方文件,加拿大可驗證組織網絡管理商業執照與許可證,德國聯邦電子身份計畫則創建數位化身份證。這些系統運用公私密鑰加密保障數位簽章不被竄改,而零知識證明使例如僅證明年齡、不洩漏出生日期等選擇性揭露成為可能。

智能合約治理架構自早期試驗型系統大幅進化。MakerDAO 的 Chief/Pause/Spell 架構為現今業界先進,系統性區分提案審核、執行延遲及自動實作。Chief 合約負責治理主管選舉,Pause 合約靠 delegatecall 代理合約落實安全延期,Spell 合約則作為單一執行物件落實通過變更。

Compound Protocol 的 GovernorBravo 架構可支持複雜提案類型及提升代理授權功能。Aave 的治理過程具備多階段投票機制——從溫度測試到正式 Aave 改進提案及鏈上投票。這些系統合計管理數十億資產,維持透明、可編程治理,是傳統機構難以想像的。

投票系統既見創新也存挑戰。目前以代幣加權投票為主,導致大戶「鯨魚」壟斷風險。二次投票制可改以費用與影響力成平方根關係等方法緩和,以需要更複雜的反女巫機制與密碼學綁定防止操弄。

液態民主則靠可撤回的代理權分配(Delegated Proof of Stake)實現,但授權鏈管理與循環防護極為複雜。在鏈上大規模應用,氣體費優化成關鍵,需結合鏈外資料預處理以達 O(log n) 複雜度。

隱私技術保障匿名參與同時維護系統完整性。零知識 SNARK 可證明投票資格且不泄真實身份,運用如 Tornado Cash 的承諾機制和祕密 Nullifier。安全多方計算則實現分布式計票但需嚴謹密鑰門檻設定。

擴展性挑戰巨大。目前主要區塊鏈治理平臺僅能處理每秒 15-50 筆交易,單案燃氣費動輒 50-500 美元。Layer 2 解決如 Polygon、Arbitrum 可降成本九成,狀態通道則以鏈下匯總、鏈上結算實現高效,但用戶體驗複雜,普及度仍限於技術導向的早期採用者。

互通解決方案正迅速演進。Chainlink 的跨鏈互通協議提供路由合約及風險管理網絡…… 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.

使治理決策能夠從以太坊 Layer 1 傳播至多條鏈上。Uniswap V3 的多鏈部署展現了在超過 5 條網路上的統一治理,而像 Unlock Protocol 這類專案則利用 Connext 橋接技術來實現跨鏈 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.

安全考量仍然是最重要的。閃電貸攻擊可讓人暫時取得代幣以操控治理流程,而預言機操縱則可能影響依賴價格饋送的治理決策。2016 年 DAO 遭駭事件展現了重入性漏洞的嚴重後果,促使業界廣泛採用安全最佳實踐,包括形式驗證、多重簽名機制及治理執行的強制時間鎖。

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.

網路國家(network state)實驗展現了一個多樣化生態系,各種專案嘗試將數位社群建設與現實世界影響相結合。這些實作提供了重要數據,有助於瞭解區塊鏈治理模型的潛力與實務限制。

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 是目前全球資金最充足的網路國家實驗項目,於 2024 年募資 5.25 億美元,創下單一網路國家專案的最大融資紀錄。其成員遍布 84 個國家、共 1.4 萬人,所屬公司總估值達 4,520 億美元,展現出強大的社群動員力。該項目現正於拉丁美洲及地中海地區物色首座 1,000 英畝開發基地,冀望可容納 1 萬居民,預計 2025 年第一季決定地點。

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 採用線上社群建設與傳統城市開發結合的混合治理模式。他們透過 PRAX 積分系統評量社群貢獻,並與 Web3 社群、AI 公司(如 ShogAI)與長壽科技企業建立策略合作,形塑出專注的生態。惟該計畫也因創辦人政治立場及理想主義與實務落差等問題,遭受外界質疑。

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 運營於宏都拉斯 Próspera ZEDE 區域,專注於長壽生醫技術研究,活動高峰期有超過 200 名居民,資金規模達 1.2 至 1.5 億美元。該專案在生技監管核准流程上比傳統地區快了 70%,成功舉辦多場研討會,並吸引生技企業進行醫療實驗,展現網路國家理念如何透過法規套利加速特定領域創新。

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.

愛沙尼亞電子居留(e-Residency)計畫是政府主導數位公民最成功案例。現有 179 國、12.65 萬名電子居民,帶來 2.44 億歐元經濟效益,投資報酬率達 7.6:1。電子居民已設立 3.6 萬家愛沙尼亞公司,占全國新創公司約 38%。該計畫創下公司設立全球最快紀錄:15 分 33 秒,100% 線上流程為電子居民平均每年節省 5 天工時。

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.

這項成功來自於具體的經濟價值——全球任意地點都可進入歐盟商業環境——以及先進的數位基礎建設。數位簽章具有手寫簽名的法律效力,整體採用率也高達 78%。近期,來自西班牙、烏克蘭與英國脫歐後尋求歐盟管道的英國創業家申請人數大增。

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 治理在數千個實例中累積了極為豐富的實際運作數據,管理的集體資產規模達數十億美元。以穩定幣 DAI 流通超過 50 億美元的 MakerDAO,是去中心化治理複雜金融體系的最成熟案例。協議成功應對 2020 年 3 月金融市場崩盤等重大壓力事件,並透過社群投票調整穩定費與抵押品種類,持續維持 150% 抵押率。

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 生態系治理參與率普遍偏低,通常僅有 5-15% 代幣持有人參與,重大決策則常由 350 至 500 名活躍選民決定。權力集中現象嚴重,最活躍的 10% 選民掌握 76.2% 的 DAO 主要投票權。Compound DAO 於 2024 年 7 月曾遭遇治理攻擊,Goldenboys 團隊購得 49.9 萬枚,總值 2,500 萬美元的 COMP 代幣試圖操控決策,充分展現這些系統的脆弱與韌性。

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.

選民參與度每季下滑 15%,若無主動倡議更形嚴重,顯示維持治理正當性的長期挑戰。鏈上手續費成為另一障礙,小型代幣持有者對投票成本極為敏感,突顯技術優化若有效實施,有望大幅提升參與民主化。

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.

特許城市實驗展現了結合現實世界的複雜性。Próspera ZEDE 依宏都拉斯的「就業與經濟發展特區」架構運作,擁有獨立法制、稅制與民法。羅丹島初步 58 英畝開發案已吸引超過 5 億美元外資,預計可創造超過 1 萬個直接工作機會。

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挑選核准外國法規,由私人仲裁法庭裁定訴訟,且美金與比特幣都被承認為法幣。稅負結構則有:企業營收稅 1%、薪資稅 5%、營業稅 2.5%、個人所得稅 5%,以具競爭力的稅率吸引國際商機。

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,法規變動威脅到整個 ZEDE 架構。總統 Xiomara Castro 政府於 2022 年廢除了 ZEDE 法律,宏都拉斯最高法院於 2024 年 9 月宣告 ZEDE 違憲。Próspera 已向 ICSID 對宏都拉斯提出 110 億美元國際訴訟,反映即便於合法架構內,網路國家實驗亦可能與傳統主權產生激烈衝突。

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.

薩爾瓦多法定比特幣政策為自上而下推動加密貨幣的關鍵個案。2021 年 9 月將比特幣列為法定貨幣、投資 1.5 億美元購入 6,102 枚比特幣儲備,但實際普及率有限。到 2024 年,僅 8% 國民經常使用比特幣,92% 市民幾乎從未以比特幣進行交易。企業採用情形亦低迷,86% 商家紀錄為零比特幣交易。

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.

由於比特幣投資到 2023 年 9 月出現 4,500 萬美元損失,加上 IMF 要求縮減比特幣強制法定地位以取得 14 億美元擴充融資方案,政府於 2025 年 1 月決定政策逆轉,比特幣不再是強制法定貨幣,僅維持私人部門自發採用。該實驗證明,強制推行的網路國家原則易遭遇民間阻力,須自下而上自然採納更具可行性。

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.

這些實踐案例顯示出一些共同趨勢。像愛沙尼亞 e-Residency 這樣的成功項目,能在現有法律框架內提供明確經濟價值。Praxis、Vitalia 等社群型實驗雖參與度高,但規模擴張受限。DAO 治理適合管理數位資產,卻難確保包容性參與;特許城市縱使合法,也難以避免高度政治阻力。

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.

有關網路國家、數位公民與區塊鏈治理的法規環境,由各式法規、執法行動和持續演進的政策共同交織,極大影響實施策略。

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.

美國監管機關已採取日趨強硬的執法立場,對網路國家計畫帶來巨大合規挑戰。美國證券交易委員會(SEC)2017 年「DAO 報告」明確指出,只要治理代幣讓持有人期待來自他人努力的利潤,即可能符合 Howey 測試而被認定為證券。SEC 於 2025 年進一步說明,由核心團隊控制、預挖、或以增值承諾推銷的代幣,多半會被歸為證券。

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)於 2022 年對 Ooki DAO 的執法行動,是最具代表性的重大監管舉措,創立了新型法律理論:所有參與治理投票的 DAO 代幣持有者,皆被視為非法人協會成員,要對違規事件承擔連帶法律責任。此一嚴格責任標準,不論知情與否皆須負責,極大打擊治理參與意願,有可能動搖網路國家所需的去中心化決策機制。

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.

歐洲監管態度較為溫和,但規範仍極為複雜。「加密資產市場監管法」(MiCA)明確排除「完全去中心化」的 DAO 與 DeFi 協議,惟多數 DAO 因仍含部分集權成分,難符完全去中心化標準。歐洲議會現正研議 MiCA v2,可能將 DAO 納入法規框架,需實體註冊與指定,細節尚未定案。

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 年通過 DLT 法案,提供全球最完善的區塊鏈治理架構,設立了「帳本型有價證券」及 DLT 交易平台的法律基礎。不過,該框架仍要求由具備執照的中介機構負責,無法支持真正去中心化結構,只能實現受監管的區塊鏈治理系統。

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

證券法相關規範也嚴重挑戰治理代幣的流通與發送。創辦團隊的集權控制、暗示代幣升值的營銷手法,或具投資契約性質,皆會在多數地區使治理代幣被歸為證券。懷俄明州的 DUNA(Decentralized Unincorporated Nonprofit Association)結構試圖透過非營利組織認定來規避證券分類,但聯邦監管機構仍可能不論實體結構,主張其管轄權。

稅務合規對網路國家參與者來說尤其複雜。美國的以公民為基礎的稅制意味著美國公民無論居住地或是否參加網路國家,均有全球所得申報義務。2025年的海外所得免稅額僅提供最高$130,000的有限紓解。DAO 代幣持有者可能被視為合夥課稅,而懷俄明 DUNA 結構則因其非營利地位可能具備某些優勢。

FATCA 申報要求、Form 8938 國外資產揭露及可能的 FBAR 申報義務,構成重大合規負擔。多國開始實施數位服務稅,針對數位平台收入,可能導致網路國家面臨重疊課稅。OECD 的 BEPS 框架協商則持續遭遇美國反對。

隱私與資料保護合規揭示監管要求與去中心化原則間的根本衝突。GDPR 假設存在中心化資料控制者,這與真正的去中心化不相容,而區塊鏈不可更改性又和「被遺忘權」的要求相牴觸。所有 DAO 參與者皆有可能共同承擔 GDPR 違規責任,且罰款最高可達€2,000萬歐元或全球營收的4%。

防制洗錢及認識你的客戶(KYC)要求亦帶來類似挑戰。FATF 標準將提供交易、託管或發行服務的 DAO 歸類為虛擬資產服務供應者(VASPs),需遵守許可與監管要求,不過單純持有治理代幣的個人多半不被歸入 VASP 定義。監管適用性依「控制或具有足夠影響力」測定,但各司法管轄區施行標準不一。

爭議解決機制作為去中心化治理結構的一大難題。傳統法律救濟需面對涉全球參與者的管轄地選定困難,而在去名化環境下送達法律文件也變得複雜。區塊鏈資產的追償更為困難,多簽機制也讓傳統扣押程序更加複雜。

鏈上仲裁系統如 Kleros 提供去中心化替代方案,但執行範圍通常僅限於鏈上資產及智能合約修改。傳統仲裁與區塊鏈證據保全的混合方案雖具潛力,惟法律認可度視不同司法區而異。

新興立法動態展現監管取向正在演變。美國國會多項提案試圖釐清 CFTC 與 SEC 的監管分界,同時為足夠去中心化的網路提供安全港規定。各州層級創新包括更進一步的 DAO 友善法規、區塊鏈治理沙盒及多州協作監管協議。

國際協同努力包含 UN 關於資安及數位主權的工作小組、歐盟正在考慮統一 DAO 監管框架,以及 G20 關於全球最低標準的討論。然而,因國家利益衝突與科技複雜度,進展遲緩。

成功的合規策略需採用風險導向管轄分析,辨識所有可能適用的監管架構、優化實體結構(如考量懷俄明 DUNA 非營利或離岸方案進行監管套利)、並完善文件保存以維持合規審計軌跡。

法律環境持續未明令網路國家發展面臨重大挑戰,同時促進法律及技術解決方案的創新。去中心化理想與監管合規之張力,將大幅影響哪些治理模型能在既有國際體系下大規模發展。

經濟模型與永續性挑戰

網路國家運作建立在融合傳統治理資金機制與創新區塊鏈原生模式的複雜經濟架構。理解這些模型,需同時檢視其理論潛力及實際推行的課題。

代幣經濟框架不僅僅是治理投票,其功能多面向。研究顯示,DAO 提案通過將帶來4.7%的代幣回報提升,而投票參與度每標準差提升亦能額外增加2.2%。這表示積極的治理參與可創造可衡量的經濟價值,使個人動機與集體決策品質相契合。

最成功的案例多採用雙代幣系統分離治理與效用功能。MakerDAO 的 MKR/DAI 模式即為典型,MKR 代幣負責治理決策,DAI 則為穩定效用代幣。MKR 藉由協議產生盈餘時銷毀,構築治理品質與代幣價值的直接經濟聯動。此模型經歷多次重大市場壓力後仍展現韌性,DAI 流通量超過50億美元卻能維持穩定。

金庫管理在 DAO 生態系中已成為一門專業。全球超過25,000個 DAO 合計管理著140至215億美元的金庫資產,但風險高度集中,81.67% 的大型 DAO 金庫主要持有自己的原生代幣。這造成一種危險的反饋循環——治理決策影響代幣價值進而直接衝擊營運資金能力。

較成熟的 DAO 開始實施專業金庫管理:包含多簽安全協定(通常為3-of-5或5-of-9設計)、多元資產配置策略,以及利用 DeFi 產生收益的進階投資手法。金庫資金預估通常足夠支持成熟 DAO 運作2-4年,但燒錢率依開發密度與貢獻者薪酬結構天差地遠。

公共財資助機制或許是網路國家經濟中最具創新性的部分。二次方資助(QF)利用數學最佳化機制讓資源分配更加民主,資助總額以個別捐款金額開根號後相加再平方計算,強調貢獻者人數多於金額,大幅減少大額贊助者的影響力。Gitcoin 已透過 QF 機制分發逾200萬美元,展現其實用性。

「公共財回溯性資助」(RPGF)提供另一種新路徑,其原則為「事後評選有用成果總比事前預測要更簡單」。Optimism 在第3輪分發3,000萬 OP 代幣(價值超過4,000萬美元),Solana 也逐步嘗試同類機制。這些系統為公共財創造了類似新創公司的資金週期,有望解決公共財供給的長期困境。

愛沙尼亞的電子居留(e-Residency)計畫為政府主導數位公民經濟表現提供最全面數據。2014年以來該計畫創造2.44億歐元經濟效益、投資報酬率高達7.6:1,光2023年就直接貢獻6,740萬歐元。2022-2023年間稅收成長33%,其中76%來自勞動稅、24%來自股利。

電子居留者創立的 31,800 多家愛沙尼亞公司,占國內新創數量38%,帶來大量經濟乘數效應。其來自185國的地理多元性為計畫增添韌性,營運模式自給自足並實現正現金流,證明其不需政府不斷補貼亦具永續性。

然而,網路國家實踐普遍仍面臨永續難題。大多數 DAO 的績效指標為負,需策略性調整;原生代幣高度集中的投組帶來巨大波動,導致營運不穩。加密貨幣市場所帶來的週期影響遍及治理參與及金庫穩定性,資產類型及收入來源多樣化不足則產生系統性風險。

參與經濟也出現令人擔憂的趨勢:治理參與度通常僅 5-15%,示民主正當性不足,而最活躍10%用戶掌控 76.2% 投票權,令人擔心寡頭操控。Gas 費成為參與另一障礙,小額代幣持有者對價格極為敏感,甚至被排除在有效治理之外。

網路國家內財富分配亦延續加密領域的結構性不平等。先行者優勢造成財富高度集中,高技術門檻則限制參與人口,大型網路效應強化成熟項目優勢,錢包管理與 DeFi 應用的複雜度更進一步阻擋潛在新用戶。

緩解策略如 GoodDollar 的全民基本收入實驗(會員逾75萬人)、微型質押及資金池參與方案降低個人經濟門檻,還有偏向小型參與者的進步式回饋機制。然而,這些方法多處於實驗階段,缺乏大規模成效驗證。

網路國家各式經營模式的收入分析 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.

展現了各種不同的永續經營方式。大多數協議的主要收入來源為交易手續費,而會員費則支持以訂閱為基礎的存取模式。服務升級則為高階會員提供加值服務;資金庫管理的投資收益則帶來額外收入,合作夥伴關係則與互補平台共同開創收益分成機會。

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.

網路國家與傳統司法轄區之間的經濟競爭動態帶來了機會與風險。像愛沙尼亞、馬爾他與新加坡等小型國家,特別有誘因參與數位治理創新,而傳統避稅天堂也正轉型為提供數位服務。然而,隨著國際協調的提升及合規成本的增加,法規套利的空間可能會縮減。

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.

成功的經濟模式必須平衡自主性與現有金融體系的整合。最具永續性的做法,是在既有法律架構下為參與者提供明確的經濟價值、多元化收入來源以降低對波動加密貨幣市場的依賴,並實施能維持民主正當性與有效決策的治理機制。

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.

地緣政治意涵與未來情境

網路國家挑戰了自1648年《威斯特伐利亞和約》以來,定義全球政治體系的主權、領土控制與國際關係等基本假設。理解這些地緣政治意義,需要探討它們既有補足現有體系的潛力,也要評估其創造超越傳統國界新型政治組織的能力。

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.

主權挑戰體現在多個層面。區塊鏈分散式權威結構與傳統單一主權控制特定領土的概念本質上衝突。網路國家跨國界的特性,讓專為有領土實體設計的司法管轄與執行機制變得更加複雜,同時其繞過現有法律與監管框架的可能性,也引發「國家被掠奪」的憂慮——即擁有足夠資源的私人利益團體可能建立替代性治理體系。

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.

各國政府的回應揭示了這些創新帶來的意識形態與實務張力。中國和俄羅斯等威權政體實施了全面性的數位主權架構,包括擴大網路管制、禁用加密貨幣及強化監控,皆在維護國家對數位社群的控制。中國的「防火長城」與社會信用體系,是試圖使數位網絡全面從屬國家權威的嘗試;俄羅斯的網路限制法亦旨在打造可排除外部影響的主權數位空間。

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.

民主制度則採取更細緻的措施,在鼓勵創新與監管監督之間取得平衡。歐盟的《一般資料保護規則》(GDPR)及數位主權倡議,嘗試在維護國家對數位治理的權威之下,保障公民隱私。歐盟—美國貿易與科技理事會則展現了於既有制度架構內管理科技創新的協作框架。

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.

美國的回應可能是最複雜的:聯邦單位積極堅守對去中心化治理的監管立場,而如懷俄明州等個別州則推動有利DAO的立法。這種聯邦與州之間的緊張關係,反映出更廣泛的問題:現有的憲政與法律架構要如何容納超越傳統司法管轄界限的治理創新。

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.

國際體系的調適亦面臨重大挑戰。現行國際法及外交架構皆預設明確疆界與階層權威的領土性國家。網路國家則以分散網絡、流動成員資格與自願組織原則運作,現有條約與國際組織難以有效因應此一局面。

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.

聯合國體系、世界貿易組織等多邊機構,尚缺乏與這類橫跨多個司法轄區、代表數百萬參與者的非領土性政治實體互動的框架。傳統的外交豁免權、國家責任與國際法律主體等概念,需要徹底重新思考,以因應主要存在於數位空間的治理網絡。

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.

隨著網路國家提供傳統國籍與居留的替代方案,移民型態可能產生重大變化。透過網路國家基礎建設促成的數位遊牧主義,使個人能在持續跨越疆界流動的同時,也維持公民參與與自我認同。這可能加速受限制司法地區的人才外流,同時為治理創新帶來競爭新壓力。

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.

隨著網路國家為對傳統政府服務不滿意的公民提供退出機會,監管競爭日益激烈。小國尤其有誘因吸引數位居民及其帶來的經濟活動,例如愛沙尼亞藉由e-Residency計畫成功吸納大量新創事業。這種競爭或可促進有益的治理創新,但同時也有造成監管碎片化、增加國際合作難度的風險。

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.

這些經濟影響超越個別網路國家的成敗,波及全球治理模式。隨數位公民機動性提升,稅收競爭可能加劇:高稅制司法區的公共財政遭到削弱,而能提供有吸引力的數位服務與監管方案的司法區則可受益。

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.

情境分析顯示多種可能的發展路徑。樂觀的合作共存情境下,網路國家是對民族國家的補充而非取代,並透過國際合作推動監管協調,使公共財融資與治理創新得以實現,同時提升公民選擇與服務品質。這需要現有制度與國際法進行大幅調適,但藉由競爭性治理與降低跨境交易成本,有望帶來顯著效率提升。

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.

悲觀的碎片化情境則涵蓋主權衝突與法律戰升高,監管支離破碎導致無法互通,財富集中擴大數位鴻溝,以及威權力量反撲數位自治。這條路徑易導致市場破碎、效率損失、監管不確定性嚇阻投資、逃稅削弱公共財政,甚至因未受監管的數位系統而帶來系統性風險。

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.

最有可能出現的,是一個兼顧平衡的場景,即在現有框架下逐步整合網路國家的創新,階段性採納有益機制、監管調適以維繫主權核心職能、有選擇地實施證明有效的治理創新,以及國際協作制定數位治理標準。此一發展歷程將維持司法轄區間的有管理競爭,透過平衡的稅收與監管,帶來適度的治理創新效率提升,並逐步擴展數位公共服務。

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.

影響情境發展的關鍵不確定性,包括區塊鏈技術擴展性與使用者體驗的進展速度、國際間對數位治理標準的協調程度、現有網路國家實驗是否能證明其實際價值、以及傳統體制是否能在不失去核心正當性的前提下接受治理創新。

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.

網路國家地緣政治未來的關鍵,在於其能否證明自己與現有民族國家間是互補而非競爭關係。唯有解決民主正當性、規範遵循與實用價值輸出的根本挑戰,並致力於國際穩定與合作,方能取得成功。

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.

這些議題的利害關係超越治理創新,事實上已指向人類在日益數位化世界中的未來政治組織型態。網路國家是對現有民主與體制失靈的回應之一,但其最終影響,仍取決於其能否兼顧滿足真實人類需求,以及維繫有效治理所需的社會凝聚力與集體行動能力。

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.

挑戰、限制與關鍵分析

儘管有顯著創新與投資,網路國家作為傳統治理體系替代方案,仍面臨許多重大挑戰,這些挑戰足以限制其實際推行及效用。務實的評估,應同時檢視其潛在益處與這些侷限。

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.

參與度與民主正當性是最關鍵的挑戰。在主要DAO(去中心化自治組織)實作中,一般治理參與率僅為全部代幣持有者的5%至15%,重要決策常由350至500名活躍投票者所決定。此參與比例遠低於傳統民主制度,足以對數千、數百萬人受影響的治理決策正當性產生質疑。

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

權力集中更加深了這些疑慮。例如在Uniswap等主要DAO中,最活躍的10%投票者掌握76.2%的投票權重。以代幣計重的治理架構,天生傾向於有能力持有大量股份的富裕參與者,這可能導致經濟不平等化、形成實質寡頭政治體系——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。代幣分配上的早期採用者優勢加劇了這種動態,因為創始團隊和初始投資者往往保留了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.

在沒有積極參與策略的情況下,選民參與率每季下跌15%,顯示在數位社群中維持持續民主參與的困難。與領土型民主國家透過地理鄰近及基礎建設共享,自然激勵民眾參與公共事務不同,網路國家必須人工地創造出集體行動所需的社會團結。

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.

技術障礙排除了許多潛在參與者,無法實質參與治理。錢包管理、交易簽章、提案評估以及智能合約互動都需要大多數網路用戶難以達到的技術熟練度。Gas 費產生額外參與障礙,在以太坊主網上每個提案的投票費用高達 50-500 美元,實際上將小型持份者排除於治理流程之外。

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.

使用者體驗的複雜性不僅僅存在於單次交易,還包括參與多重治理系統、追蹤提案進展、評估技術變更及理解複雜代幣經濟機制帶來的認知負擔。這些障礙可能根本上限制了網路國家的參與僅止於技術嫻熟的早期採用者,而非普及的民主參與。

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.

可擴展性問題表現在多個層面。區塊鏈基礎設施的限制使主要治理平台的交易吞吐量僅有每秒15-50筆,同時,能源消耗問題影響著工作量證明系統的長期可行性。雖然 Layer 2 解決方案帶來顯著的成本降低,但也增加了複雜性,可能加劇使用者體驗的困難。

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.

治理的可擴展性可能比技術可擴展性更具挑戰性。小型社群可以透過非正式協調機制達成共識,但這些機制在擴大規模時變得難以管理。網路國家必須發展可協調數百萬參與者並維持去中心化原則的制度結構,但現有提案基本上尚未在大規模人口中測試過。

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.

安全漏洞對基於區塊鏈的治理系統構成生存性的風險。閃電貸攻擊讓人能短時間內獲取大量代幣以操縱治理,這在多個 DeFi 協議利用案中已有證明。預言機操控會影響依賴外部價格資訊的治理決策,而智能合約的重入漏洞等問題則能讓攻擊者掏空金庫或操控投票結果。

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.

2022 年 CFTC 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,使所有代幣持有者都可能因此承擔監管違規的責任,不論其是否知情或有意為之。這種情況大幅降低參與意願,進而破壞網路國家所需的分布式決策網路。

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.

大部分網路國家實驗的經濟可持續性仍未證明。愛沙尼亞的電子居留計劃展示出明顯的經濟成效(產生2.44億歐元影響並有7.6:1的 ROI),但大多數 DAO 金庫表現不佳,需重新檢討策略。資金集中在原生代幣構成危險的反饋循環,治理決策影響代幣價值繼而直接衝擊營運資金。

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.

市場對加密貨幣循環的依賴影響金庫的穩定性與治理參與度,因為代幣價格波動影響持份者參與意願。大多數項目缺乏收入多元化,造成可持續風險,可能使網路國家無法長期提供可靠服務。

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削弱了長期規劃與投資。分散化的國際監管環境帶來複雜程度,使真正全球化的治理網路難以遵循合規。不同法域在證券法、稅收、隱私規範和反洗錢要求上的衝突,導致遵守一方即違反另一方的法律困境。

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.

缺乏明確的外交承認途徑,意味著網路國家處於法律灰色地帶,既沒有傳統法律救濟途徑,也未受國際法保障。這種不確定性使其難以吸引機構參與,或建立有效治理所需的穩定機構。

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.

社會與文化整合的挑戰可能使實現集體行動所需的社會團結變得遙不可及。網路國家缺乏有助於傳統社群解決紛爭和協調集體行動的共同歷史、文化傳統與地理鄰近。單純的經濟激勵,可能不足以建立穩定政體需要的信任與相互承諾。

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.

以「退出」而非「發聲」作為衝突解決機制的強調,可能阻礙網路國家發展出足以處理內部分歧及適應變局所需的制度能力。雖然退出能讓個人最佳化,但複雜的集體行動問題需要能在競爭利益間調解和凝聚共同目標共識的機構。

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,已超越單純財富分配,觸及數位包容的根本議題。網路國家可能惡化全球不平等,為技術嫻熟且具全球流動性的個人提供更好的治理與經濟機會,卻讓其他人只能依賴可能持續惡化的傳統體制。

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.

在發展中國家,網路接取、智慧型手機普及、金融系統整合程度以及加密素養所需的教育門檻,仍是重大障礙,而這些地區本可能最受益於網路國家的治理創新。若不解決這些數位鴻溝,網路國家恐沦為全球流動菁英專屬的俱樂部,而非包容性的治理創新模式。

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.

創建平行治理體系但未能解決集體行動問題的風險,或許是最大的限制。如果網路國家主要吸引的是富有且技術高超、意圖逃避課稅與法規等傳統公民義務的人群,這反而會抽離原有民主體系的資源與人才,導致全面治理品質惡化而非提升。

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.

批判性分析顯示,網路國家在自願組成的理念追求與有效治理的務實需求間存在根本矛盾。目前最成功的案例如愛沙尼亞電子居留計劃,乃在傳統體制內運作,而非完全取代之;純區塊鏈治理實驗則於參與度、合法性與可持續性面臨嚴峻挑戰。

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.

網路國家未來能否存續,關鍵在於能否解決上述根本問題,而非僅提供技術上精妙的治理解答。這或許需在去中心化及自願性等核心原則上妥協,轉向更為傳統的制度設計,以實現有效治理所需的規模、穩定與包容性。

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.

網路國家的發展趨勢,很可能取決於解決基本治理難題的能力,同時需適應限制其理想願景純粹實現的監管、技術與社會現實約束。當前實驗的經驗顯示,未來走向或將以混合模式為主,即將網路國家的創新與傳統體制結合,而非徹底取代現有系統。

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.

技術進展將大幅影響實作可能性。新興的 Layer 2 擴容方案和跨鏈互操作協議正著手解決限制治理參與與增加交易成本的區塊鏈現有限制。零知識證明技術則可實現保障參與者身分隱私又維護系統誠信的治理,有望緩解當前的監控與監管疑慮。

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.

人工智慧的整合可自動進行例行治理決策,並標註需人為審議的複雜議題,有潛力解決當前 DAO 民主參與受限的負擔。然而,AI 協助治理也產生了關於演算法責任和維持人類在政治決策裡主體性的全新問題。

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.

透過帳戶抽象、免 Gas 交易及簡化錢包介面等用戶體驗改進,有機會突破技術門檻、擴大參與,但認知負擔與公民參與的根本問題仍待解決。這些技術若落實成功,將決定網路國家是繼續作為小眾實驗,抑或邁向主流採用。

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.

監管進程趨向於建立更明確框架而非全面禁止。懷俄明州等地漸進推動 DAO 專屬立法,加上監管沙盒和國際協調努力,顯示趨勢是調和而非壓制。但這種調和很可能須要網路國家在純去中心化上做出妥協,轉向合規的混合結構。

The emergence of (原文未完)中央銀行數位貨幣(CBDC)被視為對網絡國家貨幣創新的一種潛在競爭回應,提供政府支持的數位支付系統,具備可編程特性,能與傳統治理結構整合。CBDC有望在維持國家對貨幣政策與金融體系監管的同時,帶來數位貨幣的優點。

國際機構的調適預計將是漸進且部分性的。與其為網絡國家的承認建立全新框架,現有機構更有可能針對特定議題,制定與數位治理網絡互動的機制,同時在主權核心功能上維持傳統國與國之間的關係。

針對跨境數位治理發展技術標準(類似於網際網路協定標準),可促進網絡國家與傳統系統之間的互操作性,而無需正式外交承認。這種作法將允許網絡國家為其參與者提供服務,同時在既有的國際法律框架下運作。

經濟整合的模式顯示,網絡國家將是對傳統經濟體系的補充而非取代。愛沙尼亞數位公民(e-Residency)計畫成功吸引歐盟商務活動,證明數位治理可以加強而非繞過傳統經濟框架。同樣地,最成功的DAO治理實驗,都是在既有金融體系內管理資產,而非創建平行經濟。

未來的發展可能會聚焦於網絡國家能展現明顯優勢的特定功能領域——如跨國協調數位遊牧民族、專業技術社群治理,或高效的公共財產籌措機制——而非嘗試打造全面性的替代治理系統。

社會與政治演變可能比技術能力更決定網絡國家最終的可行性。網絡國家強調自願結社與退出權,對於不滿傳統民主結果的個人具有吸引力,但主要圍繞於「共同不滿」而組織的社群,其可持續性仍屬未知。

成功的網絡國家或許需要發展更強大的社會凝聚力機制與集體認同感,超越單純的經濟誘因。這可能涉及導入傳統公民機構元素、文化實踐和共享實體經驗等,目前多數實踐尚未涵蓋的方面。

推動網絡國家誕生的全球政治極化與制度不信任趨勢,同時也為其發展帶來風險。如果網絡國家最終僅成為政治或文化分離的工具,而非治理創新的載體,則可能導致社會分裂,而非解決共同行動困難。

根據現有證據,多種發展情境皆有可能。最大化情境下,網絡國家透過技術於規模與體驗上的突破,加上監管認可及大規模的治理效能實證,獲得外交承認,成為傳統國家的真正替代方案。

而最小化情境則是網絡國家理念逐步被傳統機構所吸收,透過數位治理創新、跨境協調監管框架,以及公私協力的新型服務提供模式,擷取效率紅利,同時未挑戰主權概念的基礎。

最有可能的溫和情境,是網絡國家在更廣泛治理生態系中佔據特定利基——如為全球移動性個體提供服務、協調專業技術社群、管理數位資產和公共財產籌措,並促使治理創新實驗最終被傳統機構採納。

任何情境的關鍵成功要素,均包括透過包容性的治理機制解決參與與正當性問題、開發不依賴投機性代幣增值的可持續經濟模型、實現符合法規以支撐長期穩健運作,以及展示具體價值,證明參與所需的複雜性和不確定性是合理的。

網絡國家的未來,最終取決於其是否能藉由提升治理品質促進人類福祉,而非僅提供不滿菁英的替代方案。這需要在創新與包容間、效率與合法性間,以及自主性與融入既有服務大眾體系之間,取得平衡。

現有證據顯示,最成功的實踐將會是強化而非取代現有治理能力,提供專業化服務與創新,補足傳統機構,並解決實質治理難題。網絡國家取代傳統國家的徹底革命性藍圖,似乎不如其創新逐步融入混合治理模式,並服務更多元人口的演化路徑來得可能。

網絡國家的概念,已在數位治理、去中心化協作及公共財籌措方面做出寶貴創新,即使最終未能全面被承認這些貢獻仍會長存。尤其是當此等創新能強化傳統民主機構效能與回應性時,其意義或許超越創建另類主權實體本身。

最後思考

網絡國家可說是現代數位時代對人類政治組織最雄心勃勃的重構嘗試之一,結合數十年技術創新與自願結社、自發秩序、競爭治理等基本理念。從 Balaji Srinivasan 的理論框架,到愛沙尼亞e-Residency計畫累積2.44億歐元經濟效益,從Praxis Society籌集5.25億美元資金,到DAO治理處理數十億資產的現實複雜性,這個領域既展現巨大潛力,也面臨實質挑戰。

其理論根基融合出口主義政治哲學、奧地利經濟學及賽博龐克技術異想,為持續的治理困境帶來源頭新解;技術基礎設施層面,去中心化身分系統、可編程智慧合約治理及保護隱私的投票機制,讓過去無法藉傳統制度協調的事變得可能。

現有實踐對其可能性與限制皆有重要啟示。愛沙尼亞e-Residency證明數位公民不僅可創造巨大經濟價值,也能提升服務效率,吸引12萬6,500位參與者創立3萬6,000家公司,達成7.6:1投資報酬比。主要DAO治理體系在全球範圍協同複雜財務決策,管理百億資產,同時維持透明與可編程執行。

然而,持續的挑戰揭示了網絡國家理想與現實治理需求之根本張力。主要DAO治理系統僅5-15%的參與率,嚴重挑戰其民主正當性,而富裕代幣持有者的權力集中,產生了與包容治理原則相違的寡頭傾向。技術門檻、監管不確定性及可持續性問題,使得現階段實作僅能吸引成熟的早期使用者,而難以達成大眾參與。

監管環境同樣困難重重,政府努力應對超越傳統司法權的治理創新。有些司法管轄區如瑞士、懷俄明州,積極建構友善架構,然而主要監管者如SEC與CFTC則採取強勢執法立場,威脅去中心化治理的創新實踐。國際協調仍然有限,對真正全球性的網絡而言,合規幾近不可能。

經濟分析上呈現創新與可持續性並存的挑戰。像二次方募資(quadratic funding)與追溯性資助(retroactive funding)等公共財融資機制,展現資源分配的數學最佳化,而治理代幣體系則創造了個人與群體利益的新激勵結構。但財庫管理、對市場波動的依賴、財富集中的現象,對長期可行性構成疑慮。

地緣政治影響超越治理創新,更延伸到在日益連結的世界中,關於主權、國際關係及民主正當性的根本性問題。網絡國家可為公民移動性、監管競爭、跨境協調提供潛在解方,但同時帶來破碎化、加劇不平等和削弱民主機構的風險。

未來更可能呈現演進路線——網絡國家創新逐步被融入混合治理,結合其效率優勢與傳統機構的正當性、規模和包容力。最成功的實踐或將是在強化現有治理體系的同時,為全球移動個體、技術社群及各界帶來專業化服務和治理創新實驗,益於整體社會。

關鍵問題仍待解答Sure! Here’s your translation, adhering to your formatting instructions:

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.

關於網絡國家是否能解決根本性的集體行動問題,還是主要成為不滿意菁英的退出選項,其終極貢獻或許不在於創建另類主權實體,而是在於開創治理創新——去中心化的決策機制、可程式化的制度結構,以及民主化的資金籌措系統——提升傳統機構的效率與回應能力。

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.

網絡國家的實驗仍在持續,其動力來自於真實的治理挑戰,並由強大的科技能力所驅動。它的成功,將取決於在創新與包容、自主與整合,以及效率與正當性之間取得平衡。無論網絡國家最終能否實現其革命性潛力,或僅僅促進治理的漸進改良,它們已經展現了人類社群重新想像自我組織方式的可能性,而這種轉變或許對於解決需要跨越傳統機構邊界、前所未有協調的全球性挑戰至關重要。

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.

關於網絡國家的討論,最終反映出關於二十一世紀人類政治組織、科技能力與社會團結的更深層疑問。這些實驗值得我們嚴肅看待,不僅因為它們可能解決治理問題,更因為它們揭示了在日益複雜且高度連結的世界中,志願結社、競爭治理以及數位協同可能性與極限。

Let me know if you need further adjustments!

免責聲明與風險警告: 本文提供的資訊僅供教育與參考用途,並基於作者觀點,不構成財務、投資、法律或稅務建議。 加密貨幣資產具有高度波動性並伴隨高風險,包括可能損失全部或大部分投資金額。買賣或持有加密資產可能並不適合所有投資者。 本文中所表達的觀點僅代表作者立場,不代表 Yellow、其創辦人或管理層的官方政策或意見。 請務必自行進行充分研究(D.Y.O.R.),並在做出任何投資決策前諮詢持牌金融專業人士。
什麼是網路國家?區塊鏈治理與數位公民模式解析 | Yellow.com