How exactly could they shut it down? Its a client-side browser extension that uses peer-to-peer connections. It doesn't run on any of Google's infrastructure.

I'm getting a bit tired of seeing this comment every time Google release a new product. I understand that people think they're being insightful in saying this, but they're really not.

Furthermore, it's not even created by Google directly:

> "uProxy has been developed at the University of Washington, with help from Brave New Software. The project was seeded by Google Ideas."

Ok, to rephrase for the pedant: "Google pulls core developers off of uProxy; without leadership, multiple incompatible forks form and quickly die"

(Not saying that that will happen, just clarifying what I presume is the grandparent's point)

I'm not a pedant. And the core developers work for the University of Washington and Brave New Software, not Google. [1].

[1] http://googleblog.blogspot.com.au/2013/10/new-free-expressio...

I knew that this was going to be a comment before I even opened clicked on the link or looked at the comments. Yes, Google shouldn't have shut down Reader and now get over it.