4 ms·
The Wikipedia link does not back-up your claim in the slightest. On the contrary, it states: > The traditional way of counting consists of continually increasi
by Ansil849 6y ago
The Wikipedia link does not back-up your claim in the slightest. On the contrary, it states:
> The traditional way of counting consists of continually increasing a (mental or spoken) counter by a unit for every element of the set
- hulitu 6y agoWikipedia is known for many things but not for its wisdom. Counting is counting things. For example sheeps. You don't have 0 sheeps. Either you have 1 or 2 or 3 or you don't have any. If there are software engineers, things change because they treat 0 as an element of the list and 0 is the first in the list 1 the 2nd, etc.
- Ansil849 6y ago> Wikipedia is known for many things but not for its wisdom. I was not the one who posted a Wikipedia link. I was only responding to the fact that the Wikipedia link did not support the prior poster's claim. > Counting is counting things. For example sheeps. You don't have 0 sheeps. Either you have 1 or 2 or 3 or you don't have any. Not having any sheep is literally having 0 sheep.
- BugsJustFindMe 6y ago> Not having any sheep is literally having 0 sheep. Only if you ignore the difference between having and not having.