Skip to main content
Cross Validated

You are not logged in. Your edit will be placed in a queue until it is peer reviewed.

We welcome edits that make the post easier to understand and more valuable for readers. Because community members review edits, please try to make the post substantially better than how you found it, for example, by fixing grammar or adding additional resources and hyperlinks.

Required fields*

11
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ +1 definitely a great point! I guess all the answers to this question may seem "obvious", but I haven't seen anywhere all those "obvious" things gathered for reference. $\endgroup$ Commented Jul 6, 2016 at 8:06
  • 3
    $\begingroup$ Btw, this stopping rule applies also to non-business cases: for example, if you make some kind of research, then our results also have some abstract value and continuing "hopeless" analysis is also reasonable only until value of your analysis exceeds what you could have done instead. So in fact this decision theoretic argument can be made more general. $\endgroup$ Commented Jul 6, 2016 at 8:38
  • 2
    $\begingroup$ I think "nobody would have used ist and was canned" should probably be changed to "nobody would have used it and it was canned" - was this your intended meaning? $\endgroup$ Commented Jul 6, 2016 at 13:21
  • 2
    $\begingroup$ Thanks. I'd say that it's not only about time but about the fact that you could invest the time differently. You could instead work on research project on other life-saving drug you'd save your time but also the public will benefit from the results etc. $\endgroup$ Commented Jul 7, 2016 at 6:22
  • 3
    $\begingroup$ @ChristianSauer In my experience as an engineer the problem of a mismatch between sensors (cf gauges) and a useful purpose likely predates the invention of the transistor. $\endgroup$ Commented Jul 8, 2016 at 12:34