212th
Accuracy Rank

BlancaElenaGG

Forecasting Activity
Forecasting Calendar
 

Past Week Past Month Past Year This Season All Time
Forecasts 0 0 27 25 466
Comments 0 0 19 17 154
Questions Forecasted 0 0 27 25 175
Upvotes on Comments By This User 0 0 4 4 30
 Definitions
New Badge
BlancaElenaGG
earned a new badge:

Questions Forecasted

For forecasting in 175 questions!
New Prediction
Why do you think you're right?

Given current policy trajectories in both the U.S. and the UK, the prospect of a law explicitly linking tax incentives to independent security audits for AI models by 2029 appears uncertain. Discussions to date have concentrated on establishing regulatory frameworks, voluntary standards, and oversight bodies rather than fiscal mechanisms. Tax policy in these contexts tends to support broad priorities such as innovation, research and development, or decarbonization, rather than compliance with specific technical audits. However, it is possible that an unforeseen shift—such as a major security breach attributed to AI systems—could create the political and public pressure necessary to accelerate more targeted legislative action. In that sense, while the evidence suggests such a measure is not currently on the near-term agenda, the door remains open under particular circumstances.

Files
Why might you be wrong?

One reason this assessment could be mistaken is that both the U.S. and the UK have shown a growing willingness to experiment with targeted policy instruments in response to emerging technologies. If policymakers begin to view independent AI security audits as a practical way to operationalize trust and mitigate systemic risks, fiscal incentives could be reframed not as narrow compliance tools but as part of broader innovation and competitiveness strategies. Moreover, increasing geopolitical competition over AI leadership might encourage governments to adopt creative mechanisms—such as tax breaks tied to security certifications—to both attract investment and reassure the public. Under these conditions, legislation offering tax incentives for audited AI models could materialize earlier than expected.

Files
New Badge
BlancaElenaGG
earned a new badge:

Active Forecaster

New Prediction
Why do you think you're right?

Based on the most recent UNCTAD trade statistics, it seems unlikely that intra-regional exports in Western Asia and North Africa will reach or surpass 24% of total exports in either 2025 or 2026. While there has been some progress in strengthening regional integration and diversifying trade beyond traditional markets, the share of exports within the region has remained well below that threshold in recent years. Structural barriers such as limited complementarity among economies, reliance on external demand for hydrocarbons and primary commodities, and political frictions continue to constrain intra-regional trade. Unless there is a major policy breakthrough or a sudden shift in trade patterns, the available data suggests that intra-regional exports will remain below the 24% benchmark during the forecast period.

Files
Why might you be wrong?

One reason this forecast could be wrong is that regional dynamics can change more quickly than expected. For example, recent initiatives to deepen economic integration, expand regional infrastructure, and diversify beyond hydrocarbons could accelerate intra-regional trade flows. If major players in Western Asia and North Africa implement trade facilitation reforms, ease regulatory barriers, or expand renewable energy and manufacturing supply chains, intra-regional exports could grow faster than current trends suggest. In that scenario, the share of exports within the region might indeed approach or even surpass the 24% mark by 2025 or 2026, contrary to the conservative outlook.

Files
New Badge
BlancaElenaGG
earned a new badge:

Active Forecaster

New Prediction
BlancaElenaGG
made their 1st forecast (view all):
Probability
Answer
0%
Less than $350 million
60%
More than or equal to $350 million but less than $500 million
40%
More than or equal to $500 million but less than $650 million
0%
More than or equal to $650 million but less than $800 million
0%
More than or equal to $800 million
Why do you think you're right?

Seed funding is the first important step for biotech startups. It provides young companies with the money they need to test ideas, build teams, and begin developing new technologies. In Europe, the UK, and Switzerland, this type of funding has become an essential part of the life sciences ecosystem, supporting innovation in areas such as drug discovery, gene therapies, and AI-driven biotechnology.


According to Labiotech’s funding tracker, startups in the EU, UK, and Switzerland raised about $380 million in seed rounds in 2024. This shows that the region has a healthy pipeline of investors and new ventures. In 2025, the total so far (as of August 8, 2025) is $119.3 million. This means that the 2025 number is still lower than the previous year, but more deals may happen in the final months of the year.


Looking forward, the final outcome for 2025 and the full year of 2026 will depend on many factors. These include global economic conditions, interest rates, and the performance of the biotech sector in the U.S., which often sets the tone for global investment. However, given the historical data, it is reasonable to expect that total seed funding in 2025 will likely end in the range of $180–250 million. For 2026, if the market conditions stabilize or improve, the total could again move closer to the 2024 level, perhaps in the range of $250–350 million.


If these projections hold, the combined total for 2025 and 2026 would likely be between $430 million and $600 million in seed funding across EU, UK, and Swiss biotech startups. This would make the two-year period roughly comparable to 2024, but spread over two years instead of one.

Files
Why might you be wrong?

However, this forecast could be wrong because biotech investment is highly sensitive to global economic conditions. If interest rates stay high, investors may prefer safer sectors and reduce their support for risky early-stage biotech ventures. In addition, if U.S. biotech markets slow down or if major European funds shift their focus to later-stage investments, seed funding in the EU, UK, and Switzerland could remain much lower than expected. Unexpected events such as political instability, stricter regulations, or failures of high-profile biotech startups could also reduce confidence and keep the combined 2025–2026 total below half a billion dollars.

Files
New Badge
BlancaElenaGG
earned a new badge:

Active Forecaster

New Prediction
Why do you think you're right?

Significant progress has been made toward assembling fully synthetic ribosomes in vitro. Systems like iSAT  have successfully combined in vitro transcribed rRNA with ribosomal proteins derived from cell extracts to create functional ribosomes. More recently, ribosomal subunits (30S and 50S) have been assembled entirely from in vitro transcribed rRNA and purified recombinant proteins, demonstrating that a cell-free pathway is feasible. In 2025, a Nature Communications study achieved autonomous ribosome biogenesis in vitro -synthesizing the three rRNAs, all 54 ribosomal proteins, and assembling functional subunits within a single cell-free reaction. However, fully synthetic accessory factors and chaperones are not yet fully implemented. These advancements indicate that building a completely synthetic ribosome by 2030 is plausible, though still challenging.


Files
Why might you be wrong?

The forecast could be wrong if key accessory factors (RNases, chaperones) prove too complex to synthesize functionally. Technical bottlenecks in folding or post-translational modification of ribosomal proteins may delay progress.

Files
New Prediction
Why do you think you're right?

There is a strong likelihood that by the end of 2030, at least one major government agency in the United States, European Union, or United Kingdom will formally subject mirror biology research to dual-use oversight mechanisms. This forecast is supported by a growing international consensus, which reflect heightened awareness of the risks associated with mirror biology.

Several factors contribute to this high probability. First, there is ongoing policy momentum. In May 2024, the United States updated its federal policy on dual-use research of concern (DURC) to better address high-risk developments in the life sciences, which could easily extend to novel areas like mirror biology. Similarly, both the EU and the UK have been expanding their export-control and biosafety regulations, especially in response to emerging biotechnologies that may pose national security concerns.

Scientific concern is also rising. Leading journals such as Nature and Science, along with policy reports, have begun to highlight the potential dangers of synthetic mirror organisms—particularly their ability to evade natural immune responses or disrupt ecosystems. These risks are prompting calls for stricter oversight and precautionary governance, which regulatory bodies are increasingly inclined to heed.

Files
Why might you be wrong?

Nonetheless, there remains a chance that mirror biology will not be classified under dual-use frameworks by the deadline. This possibility stems from several challenges. The concept of mirror biology is still relatively new, and defining its boundaries for regulatory purposes may prove complex. Institutional inertia and the need for intergovernmental coordination could also delay formal action. Moreover, some aspects of this research may already fall under broader biosafety or genetic engineering regulations, reducing the perceived need for a new classification.

Files
New Badge
BlancaElenaGG
earned a new badge:

Active Forecaster

Files
Tip: Mention someone by typing @username