It would a be pretty lame cheating device if it didn’t require some clever manipulation to switch from music to communication. The TD listening to the headphones would prove very little.
Yeh, Frankie Yankovic is much better.
Bill Smythe
This is why I stated that I also believe that players should have to submit the devices to a check-in at the beginning of a tournament also. (And yes, I believe that there should be a fee for this and yes I would be willing to pay such a fee - the fee would help to cover the fact that the TD staff would likely need to be larger for this purpose.) I use a Sansa device - a name brand, with a microsd card that is also name brand. The device supplies recordings and (unfortunately) FM radio - so there is some argument there with the device - but FM signals aren’t allowed for more than a few feet without violating FCC rules.
There is no ability on the device to compute. Because of the limited number of controls, that can be quickly verified.
In terms of checking the device, all a TD has to do is ask to see the device during the game at a random time without the player touching it, with the players hands in site. The likelihood of cheating under those circumstances is very low.
Jimi Hendrix is great when attacking 
Isn’t the need for a quick fix a social issue? Chess takea long time to master. Why spend 10,000 hours to learn something when you can cheat and get the same results?
Win if you can. Lose if you must. But, always cheat–Jessie “The Body” Ventura
Actually it could also be an academic issue!!
Why spend 10,000 hours to learn something?
We will get you better results!
—From the people who will take the SAT test for you.
Jessie was a wrestling bad guy. And the bad guys always needed to cheat.
And the fans would always try to let the referee know about it.
But rarely would the cheaters get caught.
Everything from foreign objects to outside help were used.
(Just like in chess)
Is there too much pressure for things to be quick and easy?