None of this may make any sense from a technical standpoint, but I think the idea is noble and good.

Would it be possible to tweak and play with the cascades? For example:

Each premium cascade has three different operators and three different locations. And each free cascade has two different operators and two different locations.

Would it be possible (in the future) to rearrange the order of each premium and free cascade so as to give a different order of entrance and exit locations and operators?

So, for instance, I click on a premium cascade and decide I would like to rearrange the order of the cascade from the default to a different combination. So instead of the default entrance mix, I have that act as the middle proxy, and the exit mix I choose to become my entrance mix, and the middle proxy, becomes my exit. In Orion Cascade, I could rearrange the order by stipulating that Rome (Roma) be my exit proxy location, and not my middle proxy. Another time I could chose Jona, St. Gallen to be exit proxy location. This allows for more IP exit locations and thereby, expands the quality and anonymity of the cascades.

I would imagine this would be possible, assuming of course, one can arrange the proxy operators and locations to be at once beginning, middle, and end, depending on the user's wish.

This would allow for more IPs, more locations, more anonymity, more security, and more privacy,

You would get more IPs and locations, yes, but not more anonymity and privacy. The problem is that you are reducing the anonymity groups drastically with your idea. JonDonym works because it hides many users behind a single exit IP address. If everybody would be able to build her own custom cascade there would be a proliferation of exit IP addresses in the JonDonym network and, given the amount of users stays the same, thus the anonymity groups would shrink and with it the anonymity of its users. Therefore, we have quite static mix cascades and only up to 10. The latter is kind of a trade-off between having a large anonymity group on one hand and flexibility, user-choice and redundancy on the other hand.

Georg, I anticipated this response. I understand your rationale. My logic behind this is this: (1) Since there are only 10 premium cascades, there is bound to be overlap, albeit in a smaller percentage, of users using the same configuration; (2) More than this, my idea is not really centered on the population number of users per cascade, but on the strength of the three encrypted proxies; and (3)I thought the unpredictability of the entrance, middle, and exit proxies would be a strength because no one can guess where and how you enter and exit.

If someone wants to spy you out, he or she would already have an outline, a map, if you will, of each cascade, of entering and leaving; this, I would imagine, would a make a person more vulnerable; however, if a person has to guess from the ten cascades the order of of entering and exiting, it would make matters more convoluted and less predictable.

I understand your perspective and I agree the larger the number of users with the same exit IP the better, but perhaps there is a way to have a little of both worlds?

Just a thought.

Yeah, there is a way I guess. We've already had the idea to allow a user to choose her exit mix out of a pool of exit mixes. I think this would be at least something like "best of both worlds" and a move toward your idea. Unfortunately, this requires a fair amount of work which is not feasible with our current resources. But we'll keep it in mind.