[update: this isn't true anymore, there's a config flag now available that fixes this and outproxy=false is defaulted. See [1]]
This is not true. Seriously, you could at least read i2p faq before explaining other people how it works.
In Germany that's the case. Up until four years ago, it was legally impossible to offer free Wi-Fi for restaurants and other venues; and they now have to track at least every legal name of customers that use their Wi-Fi in order to not be held responsible as the Wi-Fi owner.
Technically they would have also to track a photo/ID of each customer if there weren't the GDPR/DSGVO in place that prevents that.
There's also still debate whether or not you have to have passwords in place in order to be not held responsible, which means that customers would have to "register a personal Wi-Fi account" as it's the case with city-provided Wi-Fi access points that are linked to your legal name and address.
That's what the EuGH decided with [1] and [2], the German Bundesgerichtshof before that decided that it's enough to track names only which led to the case being escalated to the European court by Sony Music.
[1] https://dejure.org/dienste/vernetzung/rechtsprechung?Gericht...
[2] https://curia.europa.eu/jcms/upload/docs/application/pdf/201...
Otherwise the main differences seem to be design-wise, where in Tor you rely on a centralized bootstrap to get the list of relays whereas I2P does this via decentralized NetDb.
It's also written in Java and the router web UI was pretty snazzy from what I remember.
Tor's take on the common proposal to do this is at
https://2019.www.torproject.org/docs/faq.html.en#BetterAnony...
and notes this threat model issue:
> There are some cases where it doesn't seem to help: if an attacker can watch all of your incoming and outgoing traffic, then it's easy for them to learn which connections were relayed and which started at you. (In this case they still don't know your destinations unless they are watching them too, but you're no better off than if you were an ordinary client.)
(I'm not mentioning this to criticize I2P's design, just to point out that the benefit you get from this decision depends a lot on your threat model!)
Some way of networking just your family members.
There used to be some I2P-only search engines but I'm not sure if they exist anymore.
Freenet on the other hand is an anonymous content distribution system. You can't use it to connect arbitrary network services together, it's only good for storing and retrieving files. Nodes on Freenet each store encrypted pieces of data but it's computationally hard to figure out what data a particular node is storing unless you have the key to access it. Files are prioritized based on popularity so old files that no one has accessed in a while and the original host is gone can just be lost forever. It's similar in some ways to bittorrent swarms. Over time as a torrent becomes less and less popular you're likely to run into issues finding a seeder that's still around.
