@steven0461 So in other words it will absolutely be past 2030 in the best possible case.

Why is this so low? Biden is by far the best bet for the Ds and he should last for a potential second term. I would be higher if not for the community prediction.

This comment was originally posted on Joe Biden

@Glossy

He thinks Washington wanted to create a false flag operation in the Donbass, something bloody, in order to draw Russia into a war.

How is this a remotely rational move? It's so risky that 66% should be overconfident.

@mumpskin Increasing buildup points in at least two directions: a predetermined invasion or a serious bluff where your opponent predictably won't back down quickly or easily. If the evidence was this cut and dry forecasters wouldn't be having such a hard time.

@Jgalt Probably because not only is it well below the 1% floor but correspondingly appears to invoke some misdirected political hysteria. That's just a guess.

— edited by ugandamaximum

Yes, but not in a way sufficient to resolve this question positively.

— edited by ugandamaximum

Why so much weight on late Dec? Question resolves ambiguously if it doesn't fall.

@hyperflare It looks like he's suggesting the question is silly, not over the line.

Watching the speech, it looks like a simple eastern intervention would be a dream outcome for Ukraine at this point.

@qw2019 They're not really comparable. Iraq was extremely hostile to the US and eastern Ukraine is sympathetic to Russia. Iraq was around the world from the US and Ukraine is next door to Russia. Russia has big PPP advantage vs US and as has been mentioned has self-sufficient arms and energy industries and a powerful trading partner in China. I think an invasion is under 50% likely; they may be willing to invade if necessary but US will probably make (private) powerful concessions to prevent this.

@victor This is a question where a good forecast is more important than some marginal points.

— edited by ugandamaximum

@Parsnip Trump by all appearances wants and intends to run. He's holding rallies and hasn't officially announced his candidacy yet for what appear to be typical-Trump financial reasons.

Base rates are not so useful on this because there is good reason to believe that Trump will run and can win.

This comment was originally posted on Donald Trump

Considering the community forecast of 27% on whether Trump will win in '24 the sum of these two forecasts is confusing.

Right now it is strongly predictable that the race will be between Trump and Biden. 47% for unknown-unknowns seems like too much. Why is the community apparently putting so much weight into someone other than Biden or Trump for '24?

This comment was originally posted on Joe Biden

A successful coup or regime change against an intelligent person with a background in the security services and over 20 years to effectively consolidate power using a world-class playbook seems very unlikely. Community is too high.

@qumidium

Therefore, it is dangerous to shut it down because it will make many people jobless (or significantly reduce their income)

According to Russian youtuber NFKRZ it's already difficult or impossible to get paid (at least from youtube and places like patreon) due to the sanctions.

It looks like the drop in community prediction from 26% to 16% in the past few days has coincided with a large number of new forecasters predicting on this question. Where did you come from? Why are you all so confident Trump won't be elected in 2024?

This comment was originally posted on Donald Trump

Is this a serious prediction? Countries led by women are already known to go to war and if two such countries haven't yet fought each other it's only because there hasn't been enough opportunity due to the scarcity (so far) of female leaders. Also, women selected for positions of national leadership probably tend to have more in common with men who land those roles rather than women in general, so it might not be a good bet to suggest they'll be, for example, more conciliatory or less overconfident than heads of state in general. *— edited by ugandamax...
@(JonathanRay) There's virtually no chance NATO is willing to risk a fight with Russia over Ukraine (particularly over the Russian-sympathizing areas most likely to be occupied in the even of an invasion). First, the major risk to deterrence ratio is way too high--WWIII consideration gives Russia the advantage here not NATO. While letting Ukraine down is predictably not good for NATO long-run it is for now a much better option than a small but plausible chance of bringing WWIII. Second, sending troops has a good chance of backfiring and not only provokin...

Can anyone explain the MASSIVE gulf in probability between this and the forecasts on here for AGI (or really, just better AI) and BCIs? Are people not realizing the connection or is there some other reason?

— edited by ugandamaximum