He was incentivized to decide whether to quit or to persevere (at the cost of other opportunities.) For accuracy, all he needed was “likely enough to be worth it.” And yet, at the moment when it should have been most evident what this likelihood was, he was so far off in his estimate that he almost quit.
This seems like it’s pretty weak evidence given that he did in fact continue.
This seems like it’s pretty weak evidence given that he did in fact continue.