Let me try again. In the first interpretation the red ball drawing signals an absence of the n=0 case for the distribution, so we have a very slightly biased sh

Let me try again. In the first interpretation the red ball drawing signals an absence of the n=0 case for the distribution, so we have a very slightly biased shift towards the red side of the potential n's, now in [0-99] vs [0-100] before the draw, so the question becomes does probabilistic gain in red bias distribution outclass the potential increase in green bias (reds now having reduced by 1 in the particular chosen n we are dealing with)? The second interpretation says that given any selected n, the probability of drawing green of the next ball from that urn can only increase or stay the same (in the all red balls urn case) compared to drawing from that urn before. It is the absolute vs relative interpretation of what the 'more' refers to. I'll grant that the inclusion of 'uniform' for n in the question suggests the absolute interpretation as the relative interpretation would be independent of the uniformity of n. The question could have eliminated ambiguity by just asking for the probability of the next ball color, but given the context of a Google recruitment test they might be more interested in how candidates reason under uncertain conditions rather than their dry probability skills.