h a l f b a k e r ySuperficial Intelligence
add, search, annotate, link, view, overview, recent, by name, random
news, help, about, links, report a problem
browse anonymously,
or get an account
and write.
register,
|
|
|
| |
Can you give some examples? A puzzle, for example, would be too easy. I think I have seen a Rubik's Cube modified to become a safe. You have to complete it to open it and obtain the locked item. That could work for truffles or something. |
|
| |
//marketed towards fat geeks// |
|
| |
I know fat geeks that would just disable/disarm/destroy the puzzle and get the snack. The trouble with dealing with smart people is the danger of being outsmarted. |
|
| |
i think the solution lies in re-usable packaging and a larger dispenser (sold seperately) |
|
| |
The snacks are sold in a secure box, which is placed in the larger dispenser. The empty snack-puzzle-containers are also placed in the dispenser, which then proceeds to fill the puzzles (a variety of which are available, rubik's-cube style is ideal, though perhaps something requiring more energy and less brainpower would be better) internally. |
|
| |
This might all add up to be a bit expensive, but what price good health? |
|
| |
Perhaps the packaging should be standard, but the physical form of the food itself is the puzzle: it requires dextrous manipulation to get it apart, into small enough pieces to eat comfortably. Formed cereal bits that interlock would do nicely. |
|
| |
Of course, I've seen lots of fat kids that would simply gnaw on the corners of whatever was handy until it was small enough to choke down. |
|
| |