This is true, though you still have to be lucky enough for a civilization to be existing at your destination in both space and time. Perhaps a civilization could exist at your destination in the perceived time when you depart, but upon arrival you end up at a time when they do not.
I think the point of my comment still stands regardless of this revision. If you could choose exactly the position in time at which you'll land, then we have a different story (though this would likely require unreasonable travel speeds).
Extraterrestrial life may not just be separated from us by space -- time is also a huge issue here. Long ago I heard an explanation from Neil DeGrasse Tyson on this, though my google skills are failing to excavate it. I'll make an attempt to explain the idea...
The amount of time for which life exists on a planet, from genesis to extinction, is extremely small on a universal scale. Intelligent life may not persist on a planet long enough to develop a means for intergalactic expansion. Even if they succeed in this endeavor, it is likely that they will be wiped out eventually by some means.
Basically, the likelihood of multiple intelligent species existing simultaneously and within adequate proximity for one to make contact with the other is extremely small. It's hard to overstate how lucky we would have to be.
This isn't my field at all, and to be honest I have a very shaky understanding of what's communicated in the article. I find it extremely interesting, though my lack of knowledge leaves me with little to say.
Most of the time when I read the comments of physics articles like this, it's to find criticism that I myself have no chance in hell of producing.
Hopefully this sort of technology is expanded upon, with two directions possible. The first is creating more self-diagnosis tools for smartphones (more relevant to those who are likely to own one). The second is creating tools for those 99.999% not likely to have an Android phone around (and perhaps to help doctors/nurses/other aides).
The article neglects that facebook is always looking to expand its feature set, with things like email (on top of existing chat) and music [1].
Also neglected are statistics pertaining to new account activations and account reactivations (secondary and post-secondary students make up a giant portion of the user base, and many make it a habit to deactivate temporarily during exam time).
This article just feels overly sensational, giving no credence to counter-arguments.
"Compared to other illegal activities they might have engaged in such as selling drugs..."
The author didn't really assume they would be dealing drugs, he just wanted to show the advantages of their current scheme over another common illegal alternative.
I think the point of my comment still stands regardless of this revision. If you could choose exactly the position in time at which you'll land, then we have a different story (though this would likely require unreasonable travel speeds).