So basically a state run bank? Disturbing politically, and with respect to the privacy implications to Ecuadorians, but otherwise technically boring.
There we greater and more interesting strides in to real digital currency in the early 90s. See, for instance, eCash[0]. The problem is, aside for some potential wrt saving the cost of counterfeiting, minting and replenishing grubby notes, there's no tangible incentive for a State to get behind a respectable replacement for cash. It's much easier just to pass the buck to the card industry.
Why is the idea of a state run bank disturbing ? Would like to see a state run bank with digital sovereign currency proposed here in California to help fund the commons and to provide consumers with checking accounts devoid of parasitic fee's like overdraft, monthly maintenance, ATM, etc( maybe credit unions are close enough).
And there is all the reason why a state would not want to adopt a currency they don't control. The ability to print money is one of the greatest powers any group can have.
It's possible that state A might want to adopt a currency that it doesn't control in order to gain increased independence from state B whose economic influence is too powerful to evade but which makes poor long-term decisions about its own state-controlled or state-influenced currency.
There we greater and more interesting strides in to real digital currency in the early 90s. See, for instance, eCash[0]. The problem is, aside for some potential wrt saving the cost of counterfeiting, minting and replenishing grubby notes, there's no tangible incentive for a State to get behind a respectable replacement for cash. It's much easier just to pass the buck to the card industry.
[0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ecash