It would be interesting to develop a distributed anonymous voting system similar to Bitcoin. Double majority voting system with a minimum turnout. Every "citizen" could vote Yes / No or simply abstain. Votes could all be verified publicly on the votechain with no chance of tampering. Maybe the miners would be the ones who would introduce the new legislation to be voted on. In this manner one could do away with the need for representative politicians entirely. A 'true' democracy backed by crypto.
The hard part of course is getting recognized and the land somewhere to set it up.
If you wait for them to recognize your claim to some land somewhere then you're going to be waiting forever. The idea of a cryptostate avoids the need to wait. The idea is to spread like a virus, not a weed.
A Futarchy requires metrics, information, data, how do we get that data?
All of my proposed welfare metrics are endogenous to the system itself (not requiring any external data source).
Now my assumption is that the leaders of the land are the people; The people need to be informed. We are able to predict all data collectively, I'm simply voicing the idea of ideological and intellectual growth as a metric to pick the best decisions.
Futarchy actually requires "the people" to be much less "informed" than other government systems (not that it's good to be ignorant). There will never be a world where everybody is perfectly informed and rational. Futarchy allows us to consider the preferences of less informed people while nullifying the effect of their bad information.
But my ultimate vision is creating a society that is run in a decentralized manner where government has taken a radical change, it still exists but is composed just as it is today with a voluntary work force, except you've freely been given the knowledge to do the duties of a firefighter, peace officer, soldier or diplomat; Do the duties with trust as your fellow citizens would like and you will be rewarded; Anyone can join at any given time, but must complete the duties assigned in a dynamically structured civic duty roster to gain their pay and responsibility.
In the long run, cryptostates will likely lead to a further decentralization of politics culminating in a sort of system of polycentric law. But that's in the long run. People won't sign on now if you make it too different from what they already understand.
Our model is not a "democratic model" as you say. Our decision making process is something in evolution and can dinamically be adapted to a a new events. For instance, if we make an evolution that makes less posible our current system we will improve it.
Our project is not for the masses. At least not in the short orr middle term. Also is not a system to be monopolystic in a territory. I thint tkat with a crytostate is the same: freedom to chosse the money. Freedom to be part of a system...
It sounds interesting, but too vague for most people.