Hacker News Reader

Comment by duncancarroll | Hacker News Reader

I like the concept, but if I may editorialize, I feel the phrasing needs work. "The smallest number you can't count to" is a negative statement, which makes it confusing right off the bat.

What do you mean, a number I can't count to? If I'm 8 years old this is like throwing a null pointer exception in my brain.

View on HN

They might also take it literally. Like, they might think that infinity is less than a million because they know they couldn’t physically count to a million.

>couldn’t physically count to a million.

This is only because they/you haven't tried.

Source: counted to a million once.

Haha I counted to 32,000 once when I was around 7/8 years old. All I remember is it taking multiple days and my mouth was dry and sore. Props to counting to a million!

How long did that take you? Seems like it take at least a week.

A million seconds is over 11 days straight without stopping for sleep, food, or anything! I very much doubt that they actually did it.

If you count one a second, you're counting very slowly. Also, you can take breaks and pick it back up, making a note where you left off. I did it this way once, growing up.

If you count one a second, you're counting very slowly.

That stops being true long before you reach the finish line. Try timing yourself counting from 147,895 to 147,900 and see how long it takes.

fair enough

I feel like this is the most likely answer, and stood out immediately when I read the sentence the first time.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com