It looks like some technologies for dealing with computer cheating are coming.
Colleges are starting to use a lockdown browser in testing environments to make it harder to cheat on the test.
There may be more than one vendor for it, but one of them is Respondus Lockdown Browser.
It isn’t free, annual license fees start around $2795, depending on the size of the institution.
As my wife noted, this doesn’t necessarily prevent cheating using a second computer, a cell phone, etc., though it might increase the degree of difficulty quite a bit. There’s an option to require that the computer’s webcam be enabled.
Some features and requirements from Respondus’ website:
I don’t know if a chess app would function in this environment, and I don’t know if the pricing could be negotiated, but this is a development worth keeping an eye on.
I think I may have mentioned something similar that I just used in college, although that could use Chrome, Firefox, or Edge (although Edge wasn’t supported I used it). What it doesn’t do, unfortunately, is account for someone using the on one computer and having a phone, tablet, or second computer right next to them running Stockfish. (Or for our tests having the open book next to you, although in nursing exams one has just over one minute per question - you didn’t have time to look everything up…) But still, for major tests like final exams we were required to come to the college in person to take them on the same locked down experience but where we could be observed. Which is I guess why the World Open will use Zoom(?) for player monitoring. But if I can think of ways around that others can.
I gave thought to wondering if a well placed ‘fish eye’ 360 degree camera could work. But I can also still think of a way around that.
My guess is you’d need at least 2 of them for a small tournament, to cover multiple angles, and possibly dozens for a major event. (Go to a casino and try to count the number of visible cameras some time, and there are almost certainly ones you aren’t supposed to notice.)
Monitoring them would require a group of trained observers.
When I went to a casino, I looked up to see how many visible cameras I could find. I lost count at 23. A floor manager asked what I was doing. I told him that I expected to see more. He said there were more than a hundred cameras, not noting the exact number. There was a whole team of people and computers making observations. There was one camera as you entered the doors of the hotel/casino. I expect that one was for facial recognition.
Future tournaments might end up that way, with cameras, signal jammers, metal detectors, and TSA style pat downs looking for chess contraband. You might have to take a lawyer with you in order to play.
If casinos are using facial recognition, they’re being pretty quiet about it, because I haven’t seen that as an argument in the ongoing discussions about restricting facial recognition software, and I know some of those states have legal gambling facilities.
WalMart tried it at one point, but then said they were discontinuing it, in part due to concerns voiced by customers, I guess.
I think it’s fairly common knowledge that casino’s use facial recognition. A quick google search seems to confirm that it’s regularly in use. The primary use is to identify those on their blacklist to keep them from entering. There is a big difference between Walmart using facial recognition and a casino as there is a much greater supply of cash and the chance of cheating. Customers generally know you’re giving up your privacy if you enter a casino. I don’t think the same can be said for Walmart despite the escalating presence of security cameras.
STOP!!! the paranoia over (c)heating is ridiculous. The reality… if a player
wants to they will cheat. Most will be caught; the really smart ones will not.
The was a 2400 young player, who played in this area. Other players felt he had a transmitter in his glasses.
No, His uncle was a master; the uncles friend was 2350