-10

Dowvoted until deleted by Community but without any explaination even if it’s well written.

Does making things like E.A sports games easier of topic or what’s else if not ?

The relevant question:

On all operating systems, there are system calls which allow pausing the process/thread for a specific period of time like 4µs or 10min.

What I want is when a process asks the Operating System to be suspended for 0.3s or 0.5s it actually gets suspended during 0.9s or 1.5s (which corresponds to the nanosleep system call on Linux).

There’s a simple way to modify those timings for the whole system :

  1. Disable Hpet (if using windows) and TurboBoost in Bios settings.
  2. Boot up Windows™ or Linux.
  3. Hibernate Windows™ to hard drive.
  4. Decrease Cpu Clock speed : something like 4.8GHz to 800Mhz
  5. Resume Windows™ or Linux from Hard Drive : if successful everything will be far more slower. I mean very much slower than if I had booted Windows™ or Linux to the actual Frequency in first place (not because of ᴄᴘᴜ usage but mainly because sleep timings affect every user actions with the system far more than most think).

On Linux the explanation is easy : this is mainly setting the kernel Bogomips parameter to an incorrect value. The reverse technique can be used to make feel an old machine is faster than in reality.

Now how to perform such timing change for a single program ? I mean how to change timings performed by sys_nanosleep() on Linux and NtDelayExecution/NtCreateTimer/NtCreateTimer2/NtSetTimerResolution on Windows ?

  • 1
    I can't see the deleted post, so I'm not sure how technical is it, but did you know there is a SE site for gaming, Arqade? – Andrew T. Feb 19 at 2:45
  • 1
    Your question being closed had nothing to do with the fact you are attempting to cheat. – Ramhound Feb 19 at 3:06
  • If such a method of cheating worked, don’t you think there would be some sort of software available that would allow you to do this without kludging it together from scratch? And if this were truly the case, don’t you think most game developers and related companies would have figured out a way to counteract it? – JakeGould Feb 19 at 3:31
  • 1
    @user2284570 And reposting that question again is not going to be a good thing either. – JakeGould Feb 19 at 17:40
1

You question was not actually closed, it was simply cleaned up for inactivity.

Without a sign that some positive activity is likely to happen here, such as someone wanting to answer it or many people wanting to upvote it, then it will likely receive the same fate in another month.

Undeleting it without some effort on your part to make it more relevant and palatable to others is unlikely to be a constructive use of anyone's time. At the very least you could show what your research has found in the month between your posting the question and now. (you have been doing some research on your own haven't you?)

Until then it remains in limbo, not actually closed as off-topic, but just unloved and as a result tidied away.


If you had read the help centre article that was linked next to the deletion notice posted by Community you would have been at the page https://superuser.com/help/roomba which tells you exactly what criteria are used for cleanups.

enter image description here


From comments below and my own thoughts

You are asking a community of people to answer your questions, so the onus is on you to make your questions relevant, interesting, inviting and even appealing to other people. Without interest from other people then the system will work as designed and clean up what looks like Just Another Unwanted Question.

You need to give people a reason to want to upvote and answer it. Make it relevant to other people somehow, involve them, get them invested, make them want to help you. As it stands it's just a pie-in-the-sky theoretical "it might be possible" and no-one cares enough about it except you.

Until other people care we'd just be going around the loop of undeleting and reposting the same question that no one wants to answer. It's not a bad question, it's just not anything that anyone is going to get invested in without some evidence that it's not just them doing all the hard work of first finding out if it is possible and then how.

As it stands I suspect that the downvotes are because it sounds like your hardware hack will only work in a select set of cases and is not particularly robust. There's no real evidence that what you want is possible and no real application for any user other than you. Sure, you can only really post questions about problems you face, but you have to bear in mind that without making it relevant to other people then you have no audience for your question and very little future value.

  • Probably because beyond the hardware hack you mentioned it is almost impossible to know if there is even a way to affect the timing accuracy of hardware/software system timers. I didn't downvote but I can't see any real use to it. My only contribution to your question would be a comment to suggest emulating a machine (NOT virtualising) a machine and then doing the things you want to run slow in that. I don't think it is necessarily unclear, but there is no real practical reason to need it. – Mokubai Feb 19 at 18:20
  • You need to give people a reason to want to upvote and answer it. Make it relevant to other people somehow, involve them, get them invested, make them want to help you. As it stands it's just a pie-in-the-sky theoretical "it might be possible" and no-one cares enough about it except you. Until other people care we'd just be going around the loop of undeleting and reposting the same question that no one wants to answer. It's not a bad question, it's just not anything that anyone is going to get invested in without some evidence that it's not just them doing all the work. – Mokubai Feb 19 at 18:20
  • @user2284570 I don't care as much about the minutiae of you problem so much as you improving your question enough to make it relevant or appealing to other people. You describing your problem at me is irrelevant to the issue of improving your question to the point it can be undeleted. The fact that you are trying to get answers to your original deleted question rather than your meta question suggests that you aren't that interested in it being undeleted and just want eyes to have seen it. – Mokubai Feb 20 at 11:57
0

Does making things like E.A sports games easier of topic or what’s else if not ?

A question on how to cheat in a video game can be within scope here at Super User. In order for that to be the case, it has to very specific, and well within the scope of our site as defined by the help center.

There's strong evidence, that the major reason for the triggered inactivity, were the downvotes themselves.

The question was simply inactive by the entire community, for a long enough period, for an automatic system to consider it abandoned.

I think the last edits make the question relevant.

Those edits were done only after the question was deleted. There are also a not so significant amount of formatting and grammatical improvements that could still be made to the question.

If the question was considered clear, it also may have got an answer.

Indeed, if the question when it was submitted was clear, it might have received an answer. It also might have gone unanswered. Even when your question is modified so it's clear enough to be answered, you might have to wait awhile, for somebody with enough knowledge to answer it. When you ask a question, you are never guaranteed, that an answer will be submitted.

So the point of this meta post is also why the downvotes

Anyone can determine the default reason, for a downvote, by hovering over the down arrow for a question or answer. When you do this, you are given a statement, which indicates the following reasons:

  • does not show research effort

  • is not helpful

  • is not clear

One does not always need to dogpile on a new author, with a bunch of feedback about their contribution, which might not be well received.

  • I've deleted the comments here as they are only about trying to solve the deleted question rather than regarding this meta discussion. Solutions and problem solving should be done on the main site question if and when it is undeleted, not on meta. – Mokubai Feb 20 at 12:04

You must log in to answer this question.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged .