---
id: 2026-04-02T19:10:14-0400
title: 2026-04-02 19:10:14
tags:
  - status/draft
date-created: 2026-04-02T19:10:14-04:00
daily: "[[2026-04-02]]"
---
# 2026-04-02 19:10:14

From a high-level, business proposition perspective
[[construction-estimating]] is identical in function to stock trading,
both typified by expert judgement under uncertainty
...
One significant difference despite their similarity
is that only in stock trading is it well understood
that individual loss is not only inevitable,
_it is how the strategy works._
If you're not losing sometimes
you're not assuming enough risk
and you're missing out on returns.

Similar sentiments expressed in the context of construction contracting
are not popular, and are frequently judged irresponsible.

I believe the tendency to set standards for estimates
beyond the optimal level of detail
stems from a named [[cognitive-bias]]
of [association](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_cognitive_biases#Association)
or [relevance fallacy](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_fallacies#Relevance_fallacies)
which leads otherwise rational estimators
to the erroneous belief that because construction is physically tangible,
risk control is more effective than in markets.
This may be related to [[2026-04-02_20-41-59#Decomposition Fallacy]].