PE 957 (a sad day for PE)

[wim59]

Wow, the PE team was forced to close the leaderboard for this problem, because the solution was leaked by luckytoilet on his GitHub repo. This person has been leaking answers for many years, but never before has PE gone to this extreme.

I felt it appropriate to send a plea to this person (see below). Perhaps if more of us did this we might put a stop to such leaks, and prevent future problems from being spoiled for hundreds of people. If you don’t want to compose a plea of your own, feel free to copy mine, which I enclose below, or DM me at wim59 on the discord PE site and I will forward your plea under my own email.

---

A sad day for Project Euler

To: luckytoilet@gmail.com · Sun, Aug 24 at 7:29 AM

Hello.

You have been posting solutions to Project Euler problems for a very long time, apparently without consequences. This has now changed, as is obvious from this footnote that the PE team was forced to add to the latest problem (957):

“Due to the fact that this problem was spoiled no more answers are accepted for the fastest solvers table.”

Please think about this: With the leaderboard at only 37, this means the fun has been spoiled for literally hundreds of people who might have vied (and were actively vying) to make it onto the leaderboard. Surely you did not mean to deprive hundreds of people of this pleasure.

I suppose it is too much to ask that you stop posting solutions altogether, though that would be best. But at the very least, may I suggest that you refrain from posting solutions before the leaderboard fills up. If even this is too much to ask, know that you are now engaged in a nefarious effort to take away the pleasure of solving PE problems for untold numbers of people, not to mention to foil the hard work that goes into producing high-quality problems in the first place.

Thank you for your consideration.

Signed,
Disgruntled PE devotee

[wim59]

I'll be darned, I got a reply to my email to luckytoilet@gmail.com -- now "Bai":

[copy paste without any edit]

Oh interesting, I'm surprised too. This is the first time it's happened - it's certainly not the first time I've got it before 100 solvers (since sometimes it takes over a year to get to 100), but I guess spoiling it before 50 is not so common.

I've been updating projecteuler-solutions since 2008, almost as long as Project Euler itself has existed, so most likely it won't stop now. I think overall it increases enjoyment of the site for the vast majority to have solutions available if needed, but sorry it decreases for some people.

[end of reply]

[hk]

I wouldn't be too happy with the reply of Dr Bai (PhD). (sic)
In fact he says fuck off

[echip]

In fact, I am considering why unLuckytoilet can periodically publish answers.

There must be some bad guys who had solved the problems sending the answers to him(via Email or something).

The reason is obvious, these guys give some answers and expect to receive the answers of the problems which they cannot solve. That was the goal of that site, they call it cooperation.(In my opinion, that was bullshit.)

Because these "weak" guys, the problems are always spoiled periodically.

This seems to be the destiny of ProjectEuler.

I am tired.

[wim59]

Another update: I responded to Bai as follows:

[wim59]

Well thank you for your reply and clarification. I suppose the least we can ask is that you do not post so early that PE has to close its leaderboards.

Thanks

[Bai's reply]

Good point, I will try to be more mindful for very new problems

[end reply]

So maybe there is some hope...

[hk]

So our action has hit him in the face. We don't accept everthing from him and his pals.

[hk]

In fact, I am considering why unLuckytoilet can periodically publish answers.

There must be some bad guys who had solved the problems sending the answers to him(via Email or something).

The reason is obvious, these guys give some answers and expect to receive the answers of the problems which they cannot solve. That was the goal of that site, they call it cooperation.(In my opinion, that was bullshit.)

Because these "weak" guys, the problems are always spoiled periodically.

This seems to be the destiny of ProjectEuler.

I am tired.

They are sending him answers via email but via his github repo too.
If you go there you can ask to recieve updates from github whenever someone spoils something there.

[echip]

Another update: I responded to Bai as follows:

So maybe there is some hope...

Hope ?? Are you serious?

Don't trust this evil guy. This guy exists just to ruin my fun on projectEuler.

[wim59]

Don't trust this evil guy...

I guess the proof will be in the pudding...

[hk]

I won't elaborate on the tricks he played on us but I think you are right echip

[universalset]

hk: Far be it from me to tell you what not to post, but I'd like to express some mild concern that linking directly to toilet's repo from this forum might be an attractive nuisance. It's not like it's hard to find if one is actually looking for it, but some passerby / new PE participant clicking out of curiosity might get tempted even when they wouldn't normally seek such a thing out by themselves.

[Lazar]

I asked him years ago to cease posting before the leaderboard is complete. I thought his position is partially correct: many people benefit from learning through the forum archives.

[byhill]

Why does he feel like his vision of Project Euler is more worthy than the people who run Project Euler? Why does he feel that he should go against the wishes of the people who actually put the work into running the website and developing the problems? Why does he think it's okay to undermine the competitive aspect of Project Euler that some users enjoy? Hiding behind the excuse of "learning" is incredibly flimsy when there is no learning to be done in his repo...

[hk]

hk: Far be it from me to tell you what not to post, but I'd like to express some mild concern that linking directly to toilet's repo from this forum might be an attractive nuisance. It's not like it's hard to find if one is actually looking for it, but some passerby / new PE participant clicking out of curiosity might get tempted even when they wouldn't normally seek such a thing out by themselves.

I removed the link.

[echip]

I won't elaborate on the tricks he played on us but I think you are right echip

I am considering all the tricks he played. Is it possible that he was a member of development team?

There's a suspicious guy on the development team. I won't mention his name for now. I don't think his performance is good enough to let him be a member of the development team, and I have no idea how he can join the development team.

The most unusual thing is that he made his account private shortly after joining the development team. I'm referring to his account on ProjectEuler, not here.

I believe he made his account private himself, not by an administrator, because as July 11, 2024, before the administrators disabled access to other people's accounts, he had posted a total of 1,740 posts, most of which were not public and apparently stored in the hangar.

This means he was still able to contribute to the development team after making his account private. If he was made private by an administrator because of being suspected of a cheater, how could he remain on the development team? So the answer is clear, he made his account private, and this is a very unusual move.

[hk]

No Bai LI (aka Luckytoilet) has never been member of the development team.
I joined PE in 2004 and as the team was created I immediately became a development team member (in 2006).
Luckytoilet became in sight around 2008/2009.
The trick I pointed to was building an auto filler for the site. That was why we had to install our captcha system.
He tried and asked others to find a way to circumvent the captcha's.
Bai Li was a high school student in around 2009. Afterwards he started university and now has his PhD.

[echip]

No Bai LI (aka Luckytoilet) has never been member of the development team.

I feel relieved when I hear you say that.

However, I would like to remind you that if unLuckytoilet joined the development team, he would not claim that he is unLuckytoilet, he would definitely use another name.

I would also like to suggest that when selecting members for the development team, you must pay attention to their character. In addition to having good problem-solving skills, members of the development team must also possess integrity.

[echip]

Don't trust this evil guy...

I guess the proof will be in the pudding...

The proof will be in the pudding...Really??? I think you're simple-minded.

I didn't read unLuckytoilet's reply carefully before, but now I do. I agree with hk. It's just a polite way of saying "fuck off".

Besides "fuck off", unLuckyToilet's reply also implies three messages.

(1) I won't stop posting the answers.

(2) It is not necessary for me not to post the answers before 100 solvers are collected.

(3) I hear your appeal. Whether or not to follow your advice is up to me, not you.

unLuckytoilet is a devil, you must admit it.

[hk]

No Bai LI (aka Luckytoilet) has never been member of the development team.

I feel relieved when I hear you say that.

However, I would like to remind you that if unLuckytoilet joined the development team, he would not claim that he is unLuckytoilet, he would definitely use another name.

I would also like to suggest that when selecting members for the development team, you must pay attention to their character. In addition to having good problem-solving skills, members of the development team must also possess integrity.

Thanks for your concern echip.
I sent you a PM how new team members are selected.

[wim59]

I guess the proof will be in the pudding...

...I think you're simple-minded.

From my point of view your accusations against the development team are both offensive and illogical. The dev team would have access to the answers from the get-go, so why the wide range of intervals between a problem release and its leak? Your theory makes no sense.

As far as me being simple-minded: You may be right, but I choose to believe that toilet man has a conscience that we can appeal to, and to me his reply (“I will try to be more mindful for very new problems”) suggests that may be the case.