Doesn’t that make i2p less vulnerable to an issue tor suffers from - that of hostile-owned relays and exit points? I remember reading something about how a large part of them were controlled by US intel.
That was the parent comment's point. My point is that there are trade-offs. You make the network less vulnerable to that particular attack, and open up other vulnerabilities instead. Anonymous communication service design is full of such trade-offs.
There's a theory that intelligence agencies control many relays. I've haven't seen evidence of it. Tor does its best to be secure even when it can't trust the relays.
