The article shows fundamental misunderstanding of why "just get started" is, indeed, a good advice. It boils down to: majority of people under-start, not over-

The article shows fundamental misunderstanding of why "just get started" is, indeed, a good advice. It boils down to: majority of people under-start, not over-start. Let's assume the following numbers: 10% start at the right time 10% start too early 80% don't start at all Those are, obviously, arbitrary numbers, but I do believe them to be "in the ballpark". When you're giving generic advice on the internet, that you cannot customize to an individual, the message clearly should be "just get started", because it targets the problem majority of people have. Yes, it's a crude approximation of truth, which is always more nuanced, but a blanket contradiction is certainly not the right answer. What the article is saying is that it's better to start at the right time than to start too early. It is also an obvious statement and a shallow one because it fails to consider that there are more states to analyze: starting too early, starting at the right time and starting too late and not at all. Starting at the right time is clearly the best choice but if you are to choose between starting too early or not at all, starting too early is a better choice and most people make a mistake of not starting at all and not starting too early.