wellbuddyweek

Fair enough, as a computer scientist I got tought to use the Neumann definition, which includes zero, unless stated differently by the author. But for general mathematics, I guess it's used both ways.

Actually, those are not the same. Natural numbers include zero, positive integers do not. She shoud definately use 'big naturals'.

Edit: although you could argue that it doesnt matter as 0 is arguably neither big nor large