[bentcorner]

> The 1 makes a lot of sense in a human world, when we count, we start at 1

As a kid I learned "one one-thousand, two one-thousand, three one-thousand" when counting time out loud, but at some point I realized this was incorrect. The prefix is the start of the nth second but it isn't complete yet, so for example stopping in the middle of saying "two one-thousand" you actually haven't reached two seconds yet.

My fix was to move the prefix to the end, so I say "one-thousand one, one-thousand two, one-thousand three".

In retrospect maybe I should have used "zero one-thousand, one one-thousand, two one-thousand".

[ziml77]

I don't think it's necessary incorrect to start at one there. If someone asks you to count out 3 seconds, you're going to say "one one-thousand, two one-thousand, three one-thousand" and only at the end of the "three one-thousand" will you have considered the 3 seconds to have actually elapsed. Basically you're already accounting for the time it's taking you to say it. Which to me seems better because if you do it the other way because it gives a better heads up as to when that second has been reached.

[8note]

None one-thousand, one one-thousand, two etc

Doesnt sound half bad