Re:Again on 0-based vs. 1-based indexing
by rmah on Wednesday January 20, 2021 @08:57AM
(#25846474)
In korea, they'd be age 2. There (and possibly other east asian nations?) count "age" in terms of which year you're in. 1st year, 2nd year, 3rd year, etc. The way americans do school year, except it starts at birth.
[ Parent
| on HN ]
Re:Again on 0-based vs. 1-based indexing
by jzwinck on Wednesday January 20, 2021 @09:05AM
(#25846553)
In Korea everyone advances their age on 1 January. Korean babies born three weeks ago are now age 2 (and have been for most of their lives).
Re:Again on 0-based vs. 1-based indexing
by klik99 on Wednesday January 20, 2021 @09:20AM
(#25846706)
When my korean friend first told me this, I honestly thought they were messing with me. I still struggle to make sense of it. Must be a helluva birthday party on Jan 1st tho
I know there are studies on how birth date affects future success in school (though IIRC I read in Gladwell, and I'm wary of accurate his read on things are), I wonder if that effect is compounded with this system?
Re:Again on 0-based vs. 1-based indexing
by naniwaduni on Wednesday January 20, 2021 @09:41AM
(#25846947)
It's just a count of how many calendar years contain you.
It's the difference between "I was born in 2010" and "I am about 10.3 years old".
Americans do this a lot too, except at a (pseudo) decade level, e.g. "are you a '90s kid?"
Re:Again on 0-based vs. 1-based indexing
by cgriswald on Wednesday January 20, 2021 @01:29PM
(#25850024)
> Americans do this a lot too, except at a (pseudo) decade level, e.g. "are you a '90s kid?"
This brings up other ambiguities. A "90's kid" might have been born in the 80's.
Yes, it’s not a clean mapping
They're in their second year.
Re:Again on 0-based vs. 1-based indexing
by randomdata on Wednesday January 20, 2021 @01:28PM
(#25850016)
> The way americans do school year
You could say that the American school year is 0-based. Except instead of naming it zeroth grade, it is named kindergarten.