It seems intended to be more anonymous and decentralized than Tor, and safer thanks to the strength of numbers, but their whitepaper is diseharteningly incomplete and disingenuous, particularly about problems that are shared with Tor.
For example:
"The distribution of Entry Nodes is a difficult topic. If oppressive governments are able to access this list,
they will block user’s abilities to access the list."
Or simply, you know, go after whoever runs entry nodes. Or run their own entry nodes and, even if they can't compromise the network, trace the evil cypherpunks who want to use encryption.
Unfortunately, some practical and political problems cannot be solved with improved cryptography.
g_simonsson
Certainly incomplete as it is still a draft, though I'd contest "dishearteningly". Also, why do you find it disingenuous? We're not shying away from what entry nodes and bootstrap of user clients is one of the hardest problems to solve.
For example:
"The distribution of Entry Nodes is a difficult topic. If oppressive governments are able to access this list, they will block user’s abilities to access the list."
Or simply, you know, go after whoever runs entry nodes. Or run their own entry nodes and, even if they can't compromise the network, trace the evil cypherpunks who want to use encryption.
Unfortunately, some practical and political problems cannot be solved with improved cryptography.