Talk:1156: Conditioning

Explain xkcd: It's 'cause you're dumb.
Revision as of 19:00, 4 January 2013 by (talk)
Jump to: navigation, search

... the main problem with this idea is that the probability of any particular driver to driver repeately around that place is not so high. Of course, if similarly conditioned animals would be on multiple places ... -- Hkmaly (talk) 08:48, 4 January 2013 (UTC)

Depending on the animal (species), and assuming a stable or growing "local wildlife" population, the conditioned ones may 1) eventually fan out (including migration) and teach other individuals or 2) breed, teach their offspring, and the offspring will fan out. Eventually -- we can only hope -- the average density EVERYWHERE per square mile of individuals would be above a given threshold to be effective 24/7. Problem solved! --BigMal27 / 12:19, 4 January 2013 (UTC)

Up the ante in rural areas by using not crumbs, but bacon, or deer musk ... nah, that would be evil. 13:18, 4 January 2013 (UTC)

If anything this would just get drivers to close their windows and not solve the problem because loud bass still penetrates car windows.

The general problem I see: once drivers get educated, animal conditioning has to be kept up, or animals will forget about basses, which would be the exact same nuisance it is trying to address. Otherwise, wildlive would forget to associate basses with food, and thus fail to educate drivers. Kind of a Volterra cycle. 18:59, 4 January 2013 (UTC) madd