User blog comment:Alemagno12/How strong is this function?/@comment-1605058-20171028095436/@comment-25601061-20171029022107

What about changing the second condition to No substring in the string appears inmediately before a copy of itself that appears inmediately before a copy of itself ? How about changing it to No substring in the string appears inmediately before a copy of itself that appears inmediately before a copy of itself that appears inmediately before..., with n that appears inmediately before a copy of itself s, where n can be any number?