Does my chess cheat device get past the metal detector?

Is this test conclusive? Did I miss something? Any other solutions aside from the faraday cage to prevent cheating? Let me know your thoughts below!

Maybe I CAN make Grandmaster...

Mike needs to understand that we're not going to stop asking questions until he actually WEARS the device.

You heard it from Mike first 3:34 . To ensure that no one is cheating, they have to be spanked with a metal detector at the end of each game.

Seven years ago I had a spinal cord stimulator implanted under the skin on my back. It's very easy to see if I have my shirt off. Obviously, it has metal wires just like your device. My wife said that I would have to notify TSA agents (US airport security) whenever we flew. I said, "Let's wait and see." It's never been detected once, either in the US or abroad, and we have flown at least 30 times. Even when I was wanded it's never been detected. So I wasn't surprised at all by your findings.

You could put a similar device in a belt buckle which is usually removed and put back on without a second thought when being scanned.

Imagine a world where chess players have to sit in a faraday cage to prevent them from using cheating devices they might have shoved up their ass

This actually makes Hans cheating much more plausible. If all you needed to beat the metal detector is silicon he wouldn't even need to use "beads" he could just put it anywhere on his body.

Faraday cage is not the only option. You can also use a GSM jammer. Honestly it is hilarious that big chess tournaments didn't see that coming.

I wonder how many chess players your machine tutorial helped.

A chess cage match like they do in wrestling would certainly be an entertaining event.

another and likely cheaper solution would be a delay between the stream and the actual gameplay. If someone is analyzing the game over the stream, the perfect answer would come way to late. And the present spectators should be tested as well.

The technique works so well when actually used as a buttplug since anal tissue is highly sensitive. Since most metal and most buttplugs are surrounded by silicone, so imagine if it is also hidden in human flesh. Unless you attaboy every player when they go through the metal detector then it can’t catch the person using the cheating device. It’s such a brilliant idea that can be prevented with proper measures sure but realistically whoever came up with the idea is a madlad.

Add to that not just the silicon but several cm of flesh (give or take depending on how thick your cheeks are), and the fact that the security guards typically don't rub the metal detector directly on the person but float it several cm around their clothes.

I didn't expect the silicone to completely hide the metal of the device from the metal detector. I will say, as a former event security worker, those metal detector "wands" don't miss things like a watch or phone or anything. It will pick it up 10 times out of 10. So if you've ever had something slip past, it's because the security person let it go. They usually have the wand set to vibrate so only they know if it goes off, and they can use their own discretion to decide if they need to investigate further. The wands are pretty effective, so it is really interesting that a butt plug was enough to hide the electronics from it. It really gives credence to the sex toy cheating theory.

Not the entire tournament, just a simple metal cage that can hold two people and a table. If the receiver and transmitter are in the cage, they will still work. Metal cages are also relatively cheap to build as well.

It would be interesting to see at what sophistication of a metal detector would detect the device. Maybe ask a security supply company or one that does security at events to see if they would be willing to see which detectors can detect it. Also would be interesting to see what thickness of materials is enough for the metal detector.

This dude just casually fucking up the world of competitive chess 😂

Another thing to think about is that if the cheater is already a good player trying to win a tournament (rather than a relative novice trying to beat a much better player), signaling every move isn't necessary for a cheating advantage, in theory you need to transmit much less information. Grandmasters have said that even just being told once per game whether or not an engine evaluates the current position as nearly equal would be enough to become the top player, since you'd always know at the key decision point whether it's strategically better to play for a safe draw or a risky win. That's one bit of information once per game. That might expand the number of possible cheating methods.

Man, that's insane that even the switch wasn't even detected