GMAT question - symantic problem?

[Misfire]

This was in a GMAT book, and I think the wording is a little ambiguous. I can see how to get two answers depending on how I read it. Thoughts?

Entries in a particular lottery game are made up of three digits, each 0 through 9. If the order of digits in the entries matters, how many different possible entries exist in which all three digits are not equal?

[ ]516
[ ]720
[ ]989
[ ]990
[ ]1321

[madnak]

I get 720, and it doesn't seem close. The first digit is one of the ten, the second number can be any of the other 9, and the third can be any of the remaining 8. 10*9*8=720. Where is the ambiguity you're seeing?

[Sephus]

the question could mean "how many different possible entries exist in which it's not the case that all three digits are equal?"

like 001. you could say "are all three digits equal? no. therefore, all three digits are not equal."

in this case, you get 990.

[CallMeIshmael]

[ QUOTE ]
the question could mean "how many different possible entries exist in which it's not the case that all three digits are equal?"

like 001. you could say "are all three digits equal? no. therefore, all three digits are not equal."

in this case, you get 990.

[/ QUOTE ]


obv a lot of v smart people are disagreeing here, but this is, imo, the correct way to look at it.

[stinkypete]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
the question could mean "how many different possible entries exist in which it's not the case that all three digits are equal?"

like 001. you could say "are all three digits equal? no. therefore, all three digits are not equal."

in this case, you get 990.

[/ QUOTE ]


obv a lot of v smart people are disagreeing here, but this is, imo, the correct way to look at it.

[/ QUOTE ]

i don't think any smart people are saying the 720 interpretation makes more sense

[The Dude]

It actually took me reading other people's responses to be sure where the ambiguity was, because it was pretty clear to me that 990 is what they were looking for.

[CallMeIshmael]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
the question could mean "how many different possible entries exist in which it's not the case that all three digits are equal?"

like 001. you could say "are all three digits equal? no. therefore, all three digits are not equal."

in this case, you get 990.

[/ QUOTE ]


obv a lot of v smart people are disagreeing here, but this is, imo, the correct way to look at it.

[/ QUOTE ]

i don't think any smart people are saying the 720 interpretation makes more sense

[/ QUOTE ]


If I had to bet on some sort of general intelligence contest, I dont think there is a person who has posted in this thread that Id rather have than Madnak. Except maybe Sephus, not sure, it would be close.

(obv disclaimer re: sample size of posts, etc)

[Phil153]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
the question could mean "how many different possible entries exist in which it's not the case that all three digits are equal?"

like 001. you could say "are all three digits equal? no. therefore, all three digits are not equal."

in this case, you get 990.

[/ QUOTE ]


obv a lot of v smart people are disagreeing here, but this is, imo, the correct way to look at it.

[/ QUOTE ]

i don't think any smart people are saying the 720 interpretation makes more sense

[/ QUOTE ]
I would take madnak over you any day.

What's more, he actually provided some linguistic analysis instead of "I'm a smart dude and therefore my opinion is right". If you actually were intelligent, you'd realize that.

Can you refute his linguistic analysis? All you've done so far is blow hot air.

[Misfire]

That's what I got too, but the answer explanation says 990. There are 1000 ways to pick numbers, but 10 of them have all three with the same number (1 1 1, 2 2 2, etc).

I would buy this if the question read, "in which not all three digits are equal" rather than "in which all three digits are not equal."

[madnak]

[ QUOTE ]
That's what I got too, but the answer explanation says 990. There are 1000 ways to pick numbers, but 10 of them have all three with the same number (1 1 1, 2 2 2, etc).

I would buy this if the question read, "in which not all three digits are equal" rather than "in which all three digits are not equal."

[/ QUOTE ]

Effing dumb. [censored] question, period. What kind of lame question would that be, even if it were worded properly?

(All three digits are not) (equal) is clumsy language. (All three digits are) (not equal) isn't great either, but is the better interpretation IMO. Just poorly written. Ass.