By having a browser ship with Tor, yes. The rest of Tor is hardly less complicated than running I2P. And I'm not saying that I2P needs to be as popular as Tor. If I2P never gets to having a competitor to the Tor Browser, it will always remain in minority use. That doesn't mean people shouldn't be aware of it or consider it as an alternative for their own use.
> combined with the network effect of Tor Hidden Services
I'm not sure what you mean by that. I2P is almost entirely focused around hidden services, and those services more or less work the same way for the end user with the added bonus that there's a loose sort of "DNS" that creates human readable URLs for services. How does Tor's services have more of a network effect than those on I2P?
> means that more people think of Tor as the "dark web" and more people will use Tor.
Yes. That also isn't anywhere near an ideal knowledge level these users should have. It's not the problem of I2P or even the responsibility of Tor per se that people think this way.
Someone who is reading this very comment and thinks that Tor is the end-all-be-all of the dark web and isn't privy to its origins should think twice before relying on it, because they clearly don't understand the tool that they are using. They probably shouldn't be doing anything remotely "private" or "anonymous" on the internet if all they know is that Tor is the magic thing they install to hide the naughty things they do.
I think people here are misunderstanding me. I'm not saying to never use Tor under any circumstance. I'm telling people to think before they use a tool with known flaws and an interesting origin story. There's nothing unreasonable about this.
