Coming to this question late but at this point with only a month remaining and the capital relatively stable at the moment it seems unlikely.
0.522466
Relative Brier Score
142
Forecasts
5
Upvotes
Forecasting Activity
Forecasting Calendar
| Past Week | Past Month | Past Year | This Season | All Time | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Forecasts | 0 | 5 | 140 | 5 | 1077 |
| Comments | 0 | 5 | 108 | 5 | 556 |
| Questions Forecasted | 0 | 5 | 58 | 5 | 280 |
| Upvotes on Comments By This User | 0 | 0 | 5 | 0 | 81 |
| Definitions | |||||
New Badge
Star Commenter - Jan 2026
Earned for making 5+ comments in a month (rationales not included).
New Prediction
New Prediction
Probability
Answer
1%
Yes
99%
No
Why do you think you're right?
Files
Why might you be wrong?
Attacks such as this are unpredictable but it does seem like there will be a bit more build up to them actually capturing it if so.
Files
New Prediction
Probability
Answer
80%
Yes
20%
No
Why do you think you're right?
Current international geopolitical tensions make this seem incredibly likely. This is further verified by others’ research on the base rate related to defense procurements for the Russia-Ukraine war (1.3-3ish more expected). While there have already been quite a few countries to sign such contracts and therefore less left to do so, I think there are at least two more. While US pressure to purchase Greenland doesn’t directly mean there will be more such defense contracts it certainly could play a role in encouraging any countries that are hesitant (just because of the message it sends about the potential future need to defend oneself).
Files
Why might you be wrong?
The exact number is a gut instinct based on the rationale above so it could be off. It’s also generally possible I am overestimating the rest of the EU’s willingness to spend or the timeline, or contracts coming from different sources…
Files
New Prediction
Probability
Answer
60%
(+20%)
Less than $350 million
25%
(-10%)
More than or equal to $350 million but less than $450 million
10%
(-5%)
More than or equal to $450 million but less than $550 million
4%
(-1%)
More than or equal to $550 million but less than $650 million
1%
(-4%)
More than or equal to $650 million
Why do you think you're right?
Going much lower based on linear extrapolation, and given low numbers from last year
Files
Why might you be wrong?
It’s not as obvious as the global funding and there could theoretically be a large project/funding amount that is counted but it would still have to be an outlier
Files
New Prediction
Probability
Answer
95%
(+55%)
Less than $1 billion
4%
(-21%)
More than or equal to $1 billion but less than $1.2 billion
1%
(-19%)
More than or equal to $1.2 billion but less than $1.4 billion
0%
(-10%)
More than or equal to $1.4 billion but less than $1.6 billion
0%
(-5%)
More than or equal to $1.6 billion
Why do you think you're right?
The rate last year was much lower than half of what would be needed to reach 1 billion so significantly updating downward on this. There would need to be some huge shift/large project for this to change.
Files
Why might you be wrong?
Maybe if it does go above 1billion it could go a lot over because something drastic must have happened, so I should have some probability in higher buckets?
Files
New Badge
Star Commenter - Dec 2025
Earned for making 5+ comments in a month (rationales not included).
New Prediction
Probability
Answer
45%
Yes
55%
No
Why do you think you're right?
My initial gut reaction is they will do all they can to maintain growth (or the appearance thereof). However, close to 5% may look good enough that it won’t need to be 5% or higher. Therefore I am going to go with most third party estimates (e.g., Goldman Sachs) even though the ones I’m seeing are US based.
Files
Why might you be wrong?
Perhaps I should trust the predictions more and go higher on no, but it’s close…
Files
New Prediction
Probability
Answer
7%
(-3%)
Yes
93%
(+3%)
No
Why do you think you're right?
Decreasing slightly with passage of time though there are still months left
Files
Why might you be wrong?
May be missing key information though it seems unlikely they wouldn’t publicize any promising talks around this
Files
Why do you think you're right?
My first instinct is this seems relatively likely, especially with the advancements in AI for coding in recent months. However reading about all the criteria for this to count including the substantial/obvious use of AI and substantial harm indicator, indicates the base rate is essentially zero. So a few percent chance with a combination of instinct and historical incidence.
Why might you be wrong?
There’s a first time for everything and AI can be used in a lot more ways than it has been previously