Yeah I hate to always be that guy, but while I think Tor is great in that it exists at all and has inspired other projects, I think I2P is an overall better design. Not having a history with the US military or funding from DARPA is a plus, IMO. Tor isn't necessarily flawed for that reason, but I trust less anything the US government takes an interest in.

For anyone wondering what we're talking about:

https://geti2p.net (Official Java implementation)

https://github.com/PurpleI2P/i2pd (C++ implementation)

The unfortunate thing is that, as far as I'm aware, I2P doesn't have a "Tor Browser" of sorts, and most people would want to use I2P as a clearnet proxy; the audience for I2P may always be significantly less than that of Tor even if it was revealed that Tor was totally flawed.

I think that I2P could benefit from selling itself less as a means of anonymity and more as decentralized, censorship-resistant web hosting. The clearnet should then have inproxies to expose I2P sites rather than the other way around, as is the typical use case for Tor. That way you can spin up an I2P instance anywhere, instantly have a web server on a unique address, and have it be available on any number of clearnet inproxy nodes as well as to anyone connected directly to the network.

Having played a lot with I2P recently, I find it more "fun" than using Tor. It lacks in content, but its focus on hidden services (eepsites) and the relatively small number of users is reminiscent of he web back when I first started using it in the 90s. I like that it has a sort of DNS system that is only as centralized as you want it, and that it has a built in way of assigning your own domain aliases. Even if you (the reader) aren't interested in anonymous decentralized networking for any practical reason, I'd say it's worth testing out I2P just to get a kick out of how novel it is.