The article is misleading.
  1. All those are only the PUBLIC nodes (those visible in public explorers)
  2. Many of those IPs are VPN/VPS, that means the real location of the nodes is not true as presented.
Correct, but these two notions are literally in the article, so it's definitely not trying to mislead:
The total network is significantly larger if we could include nodes running over Tor. It's also important to note that a resident of one country may run their node in a different geographic location. Regardless, the data provides a rough indication of the state of affairs.
reply