Simone Stolzoff

Like there's some really interesting research from people who have to pick stocks for a living.

And when your prediction is out on a limb, so like not part of the consensus opinion, you are much more unlikely to update your thinking based on new information.

But if you're part of the consensus and the consensus is wrong, it's easier for you to update your thinking next quarter.

And the reason that Katie Milkman, the researcher, cites is that when you're out on a limb, that prediction, that forecast you've made is likely tied to your identity because you're staking a larger part of yourself on it.

It's why maybe flat earthers have a harder time admitting that the world isn't flat because they've staked a lot of their identity on this idea that the world is a certain way.

And admitting that they are wrong doesn't just mean sort of changing their mind.

It means potentially having to rethink who they are.

Yeah, I think it's important to distinguish between what I'd call acute uncertainty.

So that's an open question that will be resolved.

For example, like, will I pass the bar exam or where will I get into college or will he text me back versus ambient uncertainty?

This is sort of the uncertainty that we are living in to be a human in 2026.

So whether it's climate change or the threat of AI or geopolitics.

In the first category, I think about a decision tree.

And the first question is, do you have the power to influence the outcome?

So there's some really interesting research that shows that for breast cancer patients, for example,

The period between getting a biopsy and getting the results of that test is often the hardest part of the entire journey.

More difficult than chemo, more difficult than surgery.

It's that uncertainty.

There's another study that I love that

split these research participants into two groups.