I can’t see the easy way you mentioned - could you explain?
I agree that a target of interest could be located to this service, but to correlate activity of two users would seem to require detailed logs from the provider - the logs they claim not to keep.
Also, by visiting a bank, there’s a chance you could end up being mistaken for a bank robber; or by jogging through a neighborhood, there’s a chance you could be mistaken for a thief; etc. We don’t usually give much thought to these possibilities, although they do sometimes happen. Is there any reason to treat this differently?
Sure, it's perfectly reasonable from a privacy perspective but it raises questions: I don't run around showing my passport to everyone (except for my authoritarian government) and yet I drive around with an id that the authorities can link to my identity.
Don't get me wrong, I'm all for removing layers of surveillance, but I will still assume tor users on my website are either trying to hack it or have something to hide from their government.
Yes, a vpn is clandestine. However, it isn't correct to say that Tor's traffic is clandestine (which it is), but using it isn't clandestine. Hiding your traffic's contents is the same as hiding your traffic's contents.