There have been at least two "crypto island" schemes.[1][2] Those are, at least, on bigger islands. Cryptoland didn't make the payment to acquire their island.[2] Not that you'd know this from their web site. Crypto Island is really a time-sharing condo scheme.
Both islands are too small for the number of people they want to cram on them. And the plans show no infrastructure. No water, power, sewerage, docks, maintenance facilities, or warehouses. For comparison, see Great Stirrup Cay, which is owned by Norwegian Cruise Lines and is a tourist stopover. It's 268 acres, and about half luxury hotel and half support facilities.[4] Something that size could be a viable mini-state.
[2] https://www.cryptoisland.com/
[3] https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2022/jan/16/cryptolan...
[4] https://www.google.com/maps/@25.8251893,-77.9123977,1132m/da...
Whatever else you want to say about these people, unlike some "real nation", none of them are using coercion and force to get people to organize as they see fit. That in and of itself should be lauded.
Buying the land is the easiest step in this process. It's like dreaming of being a star athlete and going to the store to pick up some athletic shoes. But then buying them and not being sure what the next step is.
People in countries like Finland have a 'freedom to roam', showing that property rights don't need to include the right to control who can enter a piece of land.
This dates from a time when people recognized property ownership, but there was no government monopoly on violence. (See especially the Icelandic Commonwealth and the Icelandic sagas.)
The strength of a government, and thus, the property rights it “grants” people, is the degree to which it has been successful in establishing a violence monopoly.