Man Sues Neighbor For Not Turning Off His Wi-Fi

Scyth3 writes "A man is suing his neighbor for not turning off his cell phone or wireless router. He claims it affects his 'electromagnetic allergies,' and has resorted to being homeless. So, why doesn't he check into a hotel? Because hotels typically have wireless internet for free. I wonder if a tinfoil hat would help his cause?"

Comments

Retard.

[XPeter]

You can't be "Allergic to wi-fi"

Put him in a room, and turn the wireless on and off. Guaranteed he won't be able to tell the difference.

Re:Retard.

[MrNaz]

I have an alergy to sunlight, usually when emerging from a dark room into bright sunlight my eyes water, my nose goes ichy and I sneeze sometimes. It lasts a few minutes until my eyes adjust. I always thought this was a natural normal reaction and thought nothing of it, indeed it makes sense that your eyes water in bright light. But no, when I mentioned to a professional, apparently it's common but not normal and has been diagnosed as an alergy.

Bee Ess.
Sensitivity to sunlight is NOT an allergy. An allergy is a disorder of the immune system. A physiological response to physical stimulation is not an immune reaction, it's a physiological reaction.

If we redefined allergy to include that, then it would lose all meaning. E.g., Everyone would be allergic to being punched in the nose because it made your eyes water. It may even make you cry like a girl.

"Indeed there are people who can die from an alergic reaction to UV light.

It's called "melanoma". It, too, is not an alergic reaction.

Yet it's plausible that people are alergic to EMF, it's certainly established that people can be alergic to parts of the EM spectrum.

No. QED.

litmus test

[MaXintosh]

I have a way to be fair to this guy, as well as punish people abusing torts. It's very simple:
a) If he can demonstrate his ability to detect electromagnetic fields under reasonable experimental conditions, they'll consider his case.
b) If he can't demonstrate his ability to detect electromagnetic fields under reasonable experimental conditions significantly more than chance, he owes the plaintiff the same amount he's seeking.

I call this the `put up or shut up` principle. Although, it might be more widely known as the `Let's not be flaming idiots` principle.

Don't sue, get $1M instead...

[nweaver]

As has been mentioned by others, WiFi sensitivity should easily count for paranormal under the James Randi Educational Foundation's $1M paranormal prize. http://www.randi.org/site/index.php/1m-challenge.html

Maybe this is a dumb question, but...

[lemur666]

...how exactly did he know his neighbor had a wireless router running, unless he used some sort of wireless device (all of which produce their own EM emissions) to specifically detect the EM emissions coming from his neighbor? And no, divining rods don't count, regardless of what Iraqi bomb squads are doing.