In what sense are they describing a state, rather than a club (or corporation or society or whatever)? States acquire sovereignty through military violence.
The analog to a typical nation state is not fully knowable today imo, but ultimately it will probably boil down to having no impedance mismatch in participating in global affairs (eg treaties, UN membership, etc) vs small independent nation states.
- A state without its own currency is a protectorate of some larger, currency-minting state. The network state passes this test, but it is left as a protectorate of whoever has enough compute to apply a 50% attack. - A state without diplomacy is a rogue state. Crucially, it requires enough diplomatic leverage to establish itself as a legally distinct entity. - A state without military is a protectorate of neighboring powers, and thus not sovereign. - A state without legal mechanisms will not even survive as a community. - A state without land is a government in exile. Historically these don't last very long, and only survive as protectorates of a larger patron state.
But yeah, the article seems very far "out there".