[dunder]

>It's annoying that such articles take it for granted that social network = FB / G+ way of doing things.

It's annoying when people are uptight about something that's merely pragmatic. They're talking about social networks people use and know about.

Including Diaspora, a network almost no one has ever heard about, would be completely counter intuitive. Diaspora simply isn't an alternative for the overwhelming majority of users of active social networks.

[shmerl]

> Diaspora simply isn't an alternative for the overwhelming majority of users of active social networks.

That's bunk, simply because people already use it and it is a functional alternative.