If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(Ozy)   Vancouver café blocks all wireless signals so customers have to actually talk to each other, enjoy a wireless-less experience   (ozy.com) divider line 43
    More: Spiffy  
•       •       •

629 clicks; posted to Business » on 22 Aug 2014 at 10:35 AM (17 weeks ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



43 Comments   (+0 »)
   
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest
 
2014-08-22 07:18:35 AM  
Do people remember how to do this?
 
2014-08-22 07:35:15 AM  
It's customer subby, customer.
 
2014-08-22 07:52:38 AM  
Six months from now... [Followup] Vancouver cafe' closes, after assuming customers actually want to interact with each other
 
2014-08-22 08:25:05 AM  
Wireless-less. Wireless-less. That's really hard to say.
 
2014-08-22 08:37:54 AM  

JoieD'Zen: Do people remember how to do this?


Tell you in a minute, some cop wants me to pull over.
 
2014-08-22 09:46:31 AM  
I don't know about in Canada, but that's illegal as fark in the United States. Interfering with radio broadcasts and emergency calls seems like a good way to summon the mounties, even for a location that bills itself as Internet-free.
 
2014-08-22 10:15:59 AM  
I was doing this way before it was cool.
 
2014-08-22 10:29:19 AM  
Its a pop-up cafe performance art thing.
 
2014-08-22 10:38:29 AM  

TwistedIvory: I don't know about in Canada, but that's illegal as fark in the United States. Interfering with radio broadcasts and emergency calls seems like a good way to summon the mounties, even for a location that bills itself as Internet-free.


I'm not sure about the details of shielding (we use Faraday Cages at work) but I know that active jamming of wireless signals is very illegal in Canada. I'm pretty sure as long as they keep it passive it's OK.

Countdown to people diagnosing themselves as EM sensitive because the feel better in there for some unrelated reason (caffeine).
 
2014-08-22 10:41:42 AM  
Your friends might even turn out to be more entertaining than that cat video you sent to them on Facebook.

Psh. Nothing is more entertaining than cats. I have an entire internet worth of proof.
 
2014-08-22 10:50:59 AM  
So Canadians are enjoying the full Verizon Experience.
 
2014-08-22 11:42:53 AM  

Heraclitus: So Canadians are enjoying the full Verizon Experience.


More like Americans are enjoying the Bell/Rogers experience.  I believe it was the OECD who published a report stating that nobody pays more money for worse mobile phone service than Canadians.
 
2014-08-22 11:43:55 AM  

Kristoph57: Your friends might even turn out to be more entertaining than that cat video you sent to them on Facebook.

Psh. Nothing is more entertaining than cats. I have an entire internet worth of proof.


Just wait 'til you discover dogs!
 
2014-08-22 11:52:10 AM  
Why would they assume I want to talk to other people?

9 times out of 10, I'm already fantasizing about punching them in their yap-hole before they even finish saying "what the fark is wrong with your face, sir?"
 
2014-08-22 11:54:36 AM  
Robert Clayton Dean: What the hell is happening?

Brill: I blew up the cafe.

Robert Clayton Dean: Why?

Brill: Because you made a phone call.
 
2014-08-22 12:01:25 PM  

Tr0mBoNe: TwistedIvory: I don't know about in Canada, but that's illegal as fark in the United States. Interfering with radio broadcasts and emergency calls seems like a good way to summon the mounties, even for a location that bills itself as Internet-free.

I'm not sure about the details of shielding (we use Faraday Cages at work) but I know that active jamming of wireless signals is very illegal in Canada. I'm pretty sure as long as they keep it passive it's OK.

Countdown to people diagnosing themselves as EM sensitive because the feel better in there for some unrelated reason (caffeine).


Is passive sheilding legal in the US?
 
2014-08-22 12:05:25 PM  
I don't trust most wireless anyway, I use my cellular data.
 
2014-08-22 12:09:19 PM  
This place in particular, I don't know how that would sit with me.  I don't like people jamming/blocking my cellular signals.  I can put the phone down on my own free will.  I swear I can stop anytime.
 
2014-08-22 12:10:29 PM  

MmmmBacon: Six months from now... [Followup] Vancouver cafe' closes after assuming customers actually want to interact with each other armed robbery results in two deaths when nobody is able to call 911 on their cell phones.


FTFY.
 
2014-08-22 12:37:57 PM  

Psychopusher: MmmmBacon: Six months from now... [Followup] Vancouver cafe' closes after assuming customers actually want to interact with each other armed robbery results in two deaths when nobody is able to call 911 on their cell phones.

FTFY.


Came here to say that.
 
2014-08-22 01:11:08 PM  
What they think their customers will do:
com-free.co
"Hi, I'm Toni.  Since I can't get a signal, I was wondering if you'd like to talk philosophy and the arts?"

What they'll actually get:
www.rantlifestyle.com

"I come in here because I hear they block the NSA's mind control beams.  Wanna see a HUGE bunion?"
 
2014-08-22 01:19:40 PM  
Wouldn't "wireless-less" mean "wired"?
 
2014-08-22 01:47:08 PM  
I read the headline and was all

i624.photobucket.com


then I thought about how illegal this would be stateside and I had a sad
 
2014-08-22 02:55:32 PM  
After a few months, the band "Wireless-less Experience" realized that they simply weren't going to get as many performances as they wanted.
 
2014-08-22 03:33:40 PM  
And if it just happens to get the guys who sit there all day using the free WiFi and nursing one small cup of Americano, so much the better.

There's always somebody who has to spoil everything for every body by milking the system.

By the way, a lot of restaurants, theatres and other places of entertainment, restoration or business have already done this because cell phones screw things up everywhere. Cafés have held out hoping that the internet would bring them some business but as things very often are, you can't give anything away without somebody finding a way to bogart the service or goods in question.
 
2014-08-22 03:38:19 PM  
Mind you, I almost never buy a coffee except in the morning on my way to work and I am so paranoid that I cover the camera lenses on my iPod with my hand when I read my Kindle books.

Just because it looks off doesn't mean that somebody isn't watching.

On the Internet, a lot of people know you are a dog. This dog wants a Faraday cage. And something that will automatically kill drones.
 
2014-08-22 04:09:12 PM  

brantgoose: And if it just happens to get the guys who sit there all day using the free WiFi and nursing one small cup of Americano, so much the better.

There's always somebody who has to spoil everything for every body by milking the system.

By the way, a lot of restaurants, theatres and other places of entertainment, restoration or business have already done this because cell phones screw things up everywhere. Cafés have held out hoping that the internet would bring them some business but as things very often are, you can't give anything away without somebody finding a way to bogart the service or goods in question.


I can't speak where you are, but here in Ottawa, that falls under "loitering"... Most cafes have a set time limit (and use of the word "reasonable") to limit how long people can stay. Technically, a manager can always step out and request people to leave, but in my experience that only happens at Tim Hortons at night with youths. Most owners don't want to risk the paradoxical loss of business when kicking out a moocher.

I do know I won't be frequenting this particular place. That article, and cafe, has one hell of a holier-than-thou tone to it that I don't personally care for.
 
2014-08-22 04:12:22 PM  
Somewhat disappointed it wasn't named "TGI Faraday's".
 
2014-08-22 04:49:38 PM  

robbiex0r: Tr0mBoNe: TwistedIvory: I don't know about in Canada, but that's illegal as fark in the United States. Interfering with radio broadcasts and emergency calls seems like a good way to summon the mounties, even for a location that bills itself as Internet-free.

I'm not sure about the details of shielding (we use Faraday Cages at work) but I know that active jamming of wireless signals is very illegal in Canada. I'm pretty sure as long as they keep it passive it's OK.

Countdown to people diagnosing themselves as EM sensitive because the feel better in there for some unrelated reason (caffeine).

Is passive sheilding legal in the US?


Probably not in their case. Passive or not that's still interfering. I believe you have to apply to the FCC for an exception and generally it is for science or security.
 
2014-08-22 04:54:45 PM  

Intrepid00: robbiex0r: Tr0mBoNe: TwistedIvory: I don't know about in Canada, but that's illegal as fark in the United States. Interfering with radio broadcasts and emergency calls seems like a good way to summon the mounties, even for a location that bills itself as Internet-free.

I'm not sure about the details of shielding (we use Faraday Cages at work) but I know that active jamming of wireless signals is very illegal in Canada. I'm pretty sure as long as they keep it passive it's OK.

Countdown to people diagnosing themselves as EM sensitive because the feel better in there for some unrelated reason (caffeine).

Is passive sheilding legal in the US?

Probably not in their case. Passive or not that's still interfering. I believe you have to apply to the FCC for an exception and generally it is for science or security.


Sec 333 of the Communications Act

"No person shall willfully or maliciously interfere with or cause interference to any radio communications of any station licensed or authorized by or under this Act."

So at least in the USA this is very illegal to do.
 
2014-08-22 05:29:01 PM  

xaks: I read the headline and was all

[i624.photobucket.com image 320x179]


then I thought about how illegal this would be stateside and I had a sad


I believe the correct English is "now I am sad" unless you think that is somehow clever. If you do then carry on

This is no way illegal in the US if you have a sign warning about it.
 
2014-08-22 05:57:55 PM  

CMYK and PMS: xaks: I read the headline and was all

[i624.photobucket.com image 320x179]


then I thought about how illegal this would be stateside and I had a sad

I believe the correct English is "now I am sad" unless you think that is somehow clever. If you do then carry on

This is no way illegal in the US if you have a sign warning about it.


Wrong.

Sec 333 of the Communications Act

"No person shall willfully or maliciously interfere with or cause interference to any radio communications of any station licensed or authorized by or under this Act."
 
2014-08-22 06:28:45 PM  
An indian restaurant I frequent for lunch (incidentally in Vancouver's neighbour, Burnaby) had a sign up the other day when I went:

"Wi-Fi Password: Talk to each other"

I talked to the owner while waiting for my food about it. Said he's actually had people saying that password doesn't work.
 
2014-08-22 07:02:00 PM  

Intrepid00: CMYK and PMS: xaks: I read the headline and was all

[i624.photobucket.com image 320x179]


then I thought about how illegal this would be stateside and I had a sad

I believe the correct English is "now I am sad" unless you think that is somehow clever. If you do then carry on

This is no way illegal in the US if you have a sign warning about it.

Wrong.

Sec 333 of the Communications Act

"No person shall willfully or maliciously interfere with or cause interference to any radio communications of any station licensed or authorized by or under this Act."


Cell Phones, Cell Phones, Cell Phones

"There are some legal ways that you can block cell phone signals, but they are a little more difficult to do, and are definitely not portable. The first method would be to place a thick steel plate between the cell phone and the associated tower. This blocks the signal, is heavy and needs to be fairly large. For example in the   office in Salt Lake City has a conference room underneath their safety deposit boxes. While the conference room is not directly underneath the boxes, they do a great job of blocking the signal."

http://www.examiner.com/article/legal-ways-to-jam-cell-phone-signals
 
2014-08-22 07:19:35 PM  

CMYK and PMS: Intrepid00: CMYK and PMS: xaks: I read the headline and was all

[i624.photobucket.com image 320x179]


then I thought about how illegal this would be stateside and I had a sad

I believe the correct English is "now I am sad" unless you think that is somehow clever. If you do then carry on

This is no way illegal in the US if you have a sign warning about it.

Wrong.

Sec 333 of the Communications Act

"No person shall willfully or maliciously interfere with or cause interference to any radio communications of any station licensed or authorized by or under this Act."

Cell Phones, Cell Phones, Cell Phones

"There are some legal ways that you can block cell phone signals, but they are a little more difficult to do, and are definitely not portable. The first method would be to place a thick steel plate between the cell phone and the associated tower. This blocks the signal, is heavy and needs to be fairly large. For example in the   office in Salt Lake City has a conference room underneath their safety deposit boxes. While the conference room is not directly underneath the boxes, they do a great job of blocking the signal."

http://www.examiner.com/article/legal-ways-to-jam-cell-phone-signals


Yeah, but if they establish your goal was to block cell signals it isn't legal. Most laws are about establishing intent.
 
2014-08-22 07:24:43 PM  

ginandbacon: Wireless-less. Wireless-less. That's really hard to say.


its up there with sleeplessnessness
 
2014-08-22 08:25:01 PM  

TwistedIvory: I don't know about in Canada, but that's illegal as fark in the United States. Interfering with radio broadcasts and emergency calls seems like a good way to summon the mounties, even for a location that bills itself as Internet-free.


If only there were some sort of powered communication device linked by solid wire to a vast network of cables and switches they could install for connecting to other devices at other locations....
 
2014-08-23 01:14:31 AM  

Intrepid00: CMYK and PMS: xaks: I read the headline and was all

[i624.photobucket.com image 320x179]


then I thought about how illegal this would be stateside and I had a sad

I believe the correct English is "now I am sad" unless you think that is somehow clever. If you do then carry on

This is no way illegal in the US if you have a sign warning about it.

Wrong.

Sec 333 of the Communications Act

"No person shall willfully or maliciously interfere with or cause interference to any radio communications of any station licensed or authorized by or under this Act."


Is a cell phone signal classified the same as radio communications?

Also...what if I open a cafe in an existing building that I know has zero signal reception just for that reason purposely?
 
2014-08-23 01:29:05 AM  

hitmanric: Intrepid00: CMYK and PMS: xaks: I read the headline and was all

[i624.photobucket.com image 320x179]


then I thought about how illegal this would be stateside and I had a sad

I believe the correct English is "now I am sad" unless you think that is somehow clever. If you do then carry on

This is no way illegal in the US if you have a sign warning about it.

Wrong.

Sec 333 of the Communications Act

"No person shall willfully or maliciously interfere with or cause interference to any radio communications of any station licensed or authorized by or under this Act."

Is a cell phone signal classified the same as radio communications?

Also...what if I open a cafe in an existing building that I know has zero signal reception just for that reason purposely?


A cell phone signal *is* a radio signal. I've looked through the FCC regs for this and they seem to hinge upon using a "device" to interfere with the signal.

No specific mention if they consider an embedded Faraday cage to be a "device," but I'd wager that their commissioner, or a federal judge would deem it such. If your business were located in a place with weak signal reception due to the construction, I'd think they'd have to prove you built it that way intentionally.
 
2014-08-23 08:02:25 AM  

hitmanric: Intrepid00: CMYK and PMS: xaks: I read the headline and was all

[i624.photobucket.com image 320x179]


then I thought about how illegal this would be stateside and I had a sad

I believe the correct English is "now I am sad" unless you think that is somehow clever. If you do then carry on

This is no way illegal in the US if you have a sign warning about it.

Wrong.

Sec 333 of the Communications Act

"No person shall willfully or maliciously interfere with or cause interference to any radio communications of any station licensed or authorized by or under this Act."

Is a cell phone signal classified the same as radio communications?

Also...what if I open a cafe in an existing building that I know has zero signal reception just for that reason purposely?


Cell is a licensed band. Same protections as radio.

If you opened in a building that is already low or no signal you are fine. You'll probably be more and more pressed to find one though as the carriers are dropping micro and macro cells.
 
2014-08-23 10:15:13 AM  

Intrepid00: Intrepid00: robbiex0r: Tr0mBoNe: TwistedIvory: I don't know about in Canada, but that's illegal as fark in the United States. Interfering with radio broadcasts and emergency calls seems like a good way to summon the mounties, even for a location that bills itself as Internet-free.

I'm not sure about the details of shielding (we use Faraday Cages at work) but I know that active jamming of wireless signals is very illegal in Canada. I'm pretty sure as long as they keep it passive it's OK.

Countdown to people diagnosing themselves as EM sensitive because the feel better in there for some unrelated reason (caffeine).

Is passive sheilding legal in the US?

Probably not in their case. Passive or not that's still interfering. I believe you have to apply to the FCC for an exception and generally it is for science or security.

Sec 333 of the Communications Act

"No person shall willfully or maliciously interfere with or cause interference to any radio communications of any station licensed or authorized by or under this Act."

So at least in the USA this is very illegal to do.


It's questionable, at best, if this would ever be deemed applicable to passive setups such as this. It's more of a deal if you have some kind of emitter doing this.

What if you built the cafe in the sub-basement of a large building? It would have the same effect..
 
2014-08-23 10:37:30 AM  

dforkus: Intrepid00: Intrepid00: robbiex0r: Tr0mBoNe: TwistedIvory: I don't know about in Canada, but that's illegal as fark in the United States. Interfering with radio broadcasts and emergency calls seems like a good way to summon the mounties, even for a location that bills itself as Internet-free.

I'm not sure about the details of shielding (we use Faraday Cages at work) but I know that active jamming of wireless signals is very illegal in Canada. I'm pretty sure as long as they keep it passive it's OK.

Countdown to people diagnosing themselves as EM sensitive because the feel better in there for some unrelated reason (caffeine).

Is passive sheilding legal in the US?

Probably not in their case. Passive or not that's still interfering. I believe you have to apply to the FCC for an exception and generally it is for science or security.

Sec 333 of the Communications Act

"No person shall willfully or maliciously interfere with or cause interference to any radio communications of any station licensed or authorized by or under this Act."

So at least in the USA this is very illegal to do.

It's questionable, at best, if this would ever be deemed applicable to passive setups such as this. It's more of a deal if you have some kind of emitter doing this.

What if you built the cafe in the sub-basement of a large building? It would have the same effect..


You probably are not allowed though because of fire codes.

Assuming though you can? Probably be fine but large buildings often get cell towers installed now and you might not be able to stop a phone carrier from installing one under FCC rules. Licensed bands give anyone with one a lot of power.
 
2014-08-23 10:41:32 AM  
The FCC interprets 'interfering' to mean active in nearly all cases.  They don't give a crap about individuals or small businesses passively blocking their own places.  See:

http://www.fcc.gov/encyclopedia/jammer-enforcement

A few cases a year where someone dropped the dime on their employer/neighbor and they sent nastygrams and sometimes fined the offender.  For active jammers.  Could find no such page for passive anything.
 
Displayed 43 of 43 comments

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »
On Twitter





In Other Media


  1. Links are submitted by members of the Fark community.

  2. When community members submit a link, they also write a custom headline for the story.

  3. Other Farkers comment on the links. This is the number of comments. Click here to read them.

  4. Click here to submit a link.

Report