Even with the best education, the number of uninformed, misinformed, uninterested and just plain dumb people is going to outnumber the informed/interested by a wide margin. And their votes are equal.
I imagine a message board, somewhat like reddit, where the subreddits each have their own weighting (a constitution of sorts, could include succession and election rules), and each voter has rpg like characteristics. The anarcho-socialism board would weight votes from people with certain properties heavier than people who dont match their idealism. The software would build your user profile points based on how you vote, inferring from like voters. Then at the end there would need to be SOME form of truth, or what each sub believes to be truth, so the software knows when a person is correct about something and when they are wrong.
The beauty of this system being that a person can vote all over the place, and be considered an expert in one sub, and an idiot in another, but still be able to participate in both systems. Multiple parallel reality consensuss can be formed, and then compared to the popular consensus.
I think the wired article is decent, maybe it misses one important notion: the five stars movement has been critical at giving a lot of millennials some new interest in politics. For sure it's not the perfect party, but from a participation pov is the best thing we've had in Italy since decades.
If you don't like this, then you don't like democracy. If that's so, no problem, you're in good company. The ancients disliked democracy because in their experience it inevitably degenerated to tyranny. Republicanism and federalism are two ways to attempt to garner the benefits of popular rule while mitigating the drawbacks.
I pay for paper wired, i should probably figure out how to sign in someday...