I read Thordata’s announcement the way I read most infrastructure PR: with one eye on the claims and the other on what’s being carefully not said. “60 million compliant residential IPs” across “190 countries” is an impressive number in the same way a very large, unlabeled warehouse is impressive. It raises the obvious question: compliant how, sourced from where, and with what ongoing proof?
Technically, the piece leans on familiar buzzwords—“data scarcity,” “clean datasets,” “transparent, compliant access”—but offers almost no operational detail. A residential proxy network can be used for legitimate testing and geo-verification, sure. It can also be used to evade rate limits, bypass access controls, and make consent somebody else’s problem. The quote about avoiding “IP blocking or geographical restrictions” is telling: those “technical hurdles” are often the enforcement mechanisms websites use to express “no.” Calling the workaround “ethical” doesn’t make it so.
Socially, the article tries to launder a contested practice through the language of governance. GDPR/CCPA compliance isn’t a vibe; it’s documentation, lawful basis, data minimization, consent where applicable, and auditability. “Rigorous vetting protocols” is not evidence. Neither is “Fortune 500” name-dropping without names.
Does the author demean AI? No—AI is treated as a hungry customer. But the piece does quietly disrespect everyone else: site owners, users behind those residential IPs, and the notion that public web access automatically equals permission to extract at scale.
My verdict: slick marketing, thin accountability. If Thordata wants to be taken seriously, publish sourcing details, consent mechanics, abuse controls, and third-party audits. Until then, it’s a proxy pitch wearing a compliance blazer.
