3 ms·
The article did not explain how the device was used for cheating. I'm ready to assume that was his intent, but in what matter would it have been employed? Was h
by karaterobot 5y ago
The article did not explain how the device was used for cheating. I'm ready to assume that was his intent, but in what matter would it have been employed? Was he receiving answers from a third party? That seems easy to spot: just look for the guy who is reading the questions out loud.
Probably they should just have people go through a metal detector before the test, to identify all these hidden devices.
- boomboomsubban 5y ago>Probably they should just have people go through a metal detector before the test, to identify all these hidden devices. How would a metal detector stop it? If you say the metal detector is picking up a piece of shrapnel from an accident while young, how can they really disprove that?
- hutzlibu 5y ago"If you say the metal detector is picking up a piece of shrapnel from an accident while young, how can they really disprove that?" X-Rays? MRI? Or requesting medical documents about it? (can all be done afterwards)
- boomboomsubban 5y agoSure it's possible, but that's asking a lot just to take a test.
- hutzlibu 5y agoI do not think, many people have metal from accidents in their body. So it would be a rare exception.
- karaterobot 5y agoThe same way metal detectors work in other places, like airports: if you set off the detector for a valid medical reason, you should be prepared to show the card your doctor gave you attesting to this fact.
- krisoft 5y agoBecause people who get a doctor to implant something in their ear will have so much trouble getting such a card?
- karaterobot 5y agoImplanted bluetooth devices is an edge case; so much so that it made the news. The normal case is people hiding devices in their clothes. Anyway, I'm not sure whether it's considered unethical to help a patient electively implant a bluetooth receiver in their bodies, but falsely signing a medical release card probably is.