Here are two links that lead to the same problem, Ugly Expression Probability by Daniel Liu.

1) Link 1

2) Link 2

If you follow both these links, you'll see that there are two [not that much] different solutions posted by two different users.

My question would be how did this problem come to have two direct links? Could the staff look into this?

PS: I am aware that after switching to this new format, some old problems got new links. But the problem I'm talking about here is not old. It's new.

EDIT: Here's something absolutely crazy. Try liking the problem from link 1. Then go your 'liked' feed. What do you see?

EDIT 2: The thing is Daniel Liu's Ugly Expression Probability [link 1] and Sreejato Bhattacharya's Find the Angle have this in common: /?group=sMpckcoT8pTx.

## Comments

Sort by:

TopNewestI'd like to dispel the confusion going on, because I know exactly what happened.

I created the problem with a little difference from the final one you see here (different range). I realized that there was a mistake on my part, so I deleted the problem, intending to write it again. However, for some reason I got off track and never remade the problem.

Then, somehow Calvin fished up the problem (perhaps before it was deleted) and put it on his set. After I deleted the problem, the instance of the problem on the set became independent of the erased instance of the problem.

You can still access the erased instance via a direct link.

Does this answer your questions? – Daniel Liu · 3 years, 1 month ago

Log in to reply

Few more things.

The question doesn't appear on searching "Ugly Expression Probability" .(Even though this note does)

The recent solvers list is 4 people short. Infact, the person who posted the other solution doesn't appear.

I still have the option of posting a solution on the first link, even though I posted a solution on the second.

Log in to reply

The answer was updated, and so we might not properly account for the "recent solvers list".

Yes, it's essentially two different discussions.

Log in to reply

– Mursalin Habib · 3 years, 1 month ago

I am already aware of point number 1. Weird, isn't it?Log in to reply

Both links refer to the same problem. Generally we send everyone to the same link, but there could be speed issues where we end up creating different links for different people. – Calvin Lin Staff · 3 years, 1 month ago

Log in to reply

– Mursalin Habib · 3 years, 1 month ago

I think I now know how to make multiple links for the same problem. However, as far as I know, there is no room for abuse. So, no worries!Log in to reply

Here's something absolutely crazy. Try liking the problem from link 1. Then go your 'liked' feed. What do you see? – Mursalin Habib · 3 years, 1 month ago

Log in to reply

– Lokesh Sharma · 3 years, 1 month ago

The problem is not available on profile of the creator.Log in to reply

This is very interesting. The one thing different in these two links is their addresses. Everything including people who have solved this problem is same. Let's see if inserting a solution in one link induces the same solution in other link or not. Clicking on reveal solutions – Lokesh Sharma · 3 years, 1 month ago

Log in to reply

– Lokesh Sharma · 3 years, 1 month ago

The solutions to both these problems are different. So, they are really different problems. My guess is that user made a mistake and posted another problem. Later he realised that he can edit problem so he edited the previous problems and now both the problems have same wording which seems to fool someone into believing that these two problems are same.Log in to reply

– Lokesh Sharma · 3 years, 1 month ago

But that's not likely possible because both the problems were created 18 hours ago by an experienced user.Log in to reply

Log in to reply

– Gaurav Singh · 3 years, 1 month ago

those who haven`t solve this question till now, can solve by this.Log in to reply

– Lokesh Sharma · 3 years, 1 month ago

fixing it.Log in to reply

– Lokesh Sharma · 3 years, 1 month ago

It's been fixed. Thanks for letting me know earlier.Log in to reply