The ceasefire appears to be tenuous and a single round of tensions arising (lets say ~25% in 2 months) would probably have a 50% chance of triggering these criteria, judging from the death toll in the dozens from earlier in the year.
-0.074511
Relative Brier Score
116
Forecasts
13
Upvotes
Forecasting Calendar
| Past Week | Past Month | Past Year | This Season | All Time | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Forecasts | 0 | 3 | 116 | 116 | 116 |
| Comments | 0 | 3 | 115 | 115 | 115 |
| Questions Forecasted | 0 | 3 | 41 | 41 | 41 |
| Upvotes on Comments By This User | 0 | 0 | 13 | 13 | 13 |
| Definitions | |||||
Why do you think you're right?
Why might you be wrong?
I could be too low (ceasefire may already have broken down) or too high (purely symbolic suspension of the peace deal).
Why do you think you're right?
time decay
Why might you be wrong?
time decay
Star Commenter - Oct 2025
Why do you think you're right?
There's just not a lot of time left for this to resolve YES.
Why might you be wrong?
Perhaps this is actively in the works unbeknownst to me or the community.
Why do you think you're right?
Time decay; adjusting downward
Why might you be wrong?
Time decay; adjusting downward
Why do you think you're right?
Community forecast has been going down, but I think this is misguided. There are still opportunities with Syria, Saudi Arabia, and smaller nations, in particular.
Why might you be wrong?
I am perhaps over-estimating the demand within 6 months for these kinds of deals; perhaps they're more likely on a 1-2 year time horizon.
Why do you think you're right?
Continue to think this is a good 6 month rate, prospectively. Community seems too low.
Why might you be wrong?
Continue to think this is a good 6 month rate, prospectively. Lot of uncertainty with Xi's grip on power seemingly weakeningly slightly.
Why do you think you're right?
Continue to believe this is a good 18 month rate prospectively
Why might you be wrong?
Continue to believe this is a good 18 month rate prospectively
Why do you think you're right?
I remain slightly above the crowd aggregate forecast, at 6%, due to possibilities for norm-changing FDA pathways in this administration. But it is quite unlikely to occur in this timeframe.
Why might you be wrong?
I think this is unlikely to occur due to the strict limitations and timelines of the FDA approval process (no evidence that there is any device currently in the pipeline). I may be overestimating the likelihood even sitting at 6%. I may also be underestimating the likelihood if there's a broader definition for "LLM-based functionality" and a device meeting these criteria that it's possible the crowd is missing.