"Trump is negotiating the end of the conflict in Ukraine directly with Russia. NK is directly involved in the conflict, yet the country hasn't been mentioned so far in the talks. THE DIPLOMAT - Any real prospects of reviving the U.N. sanctions regime will require Moscow to recommit to U.N. sanctions β a daunting, perhaps impossible, task. The bigger problem, however, is that neither Trump nor Putin has much incentive to address the North Korea issue. The dilemma is that Putin has few incentives to abandon his new strategic partner, North Korea, and Trump has few incentives to revisit one of his biggest foreign policy failures of his first term. [1] The feeling is probably reciprocal. Putin and Trump don't want to address the NK problem, and KJU doesn't want NK to be addressed at all. In the current context, performing a new nuclear test would serve no purpose other than creating problems for Putin (who is paying handsomely for North Korean supplies of weapons and personnel) and triggering a potential reinvigorated reaction of volatile Trump."
0.152138
Relative Brier Score
Questions Forecasted
Scored Questions
66
Forecasts
4
Upvotes
Forecasting Calendar
Past Week | Past Month | Past Year | This Season | All Time | |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
Forecasts | 0 | 10 | 306 | 66 | 1188 |
Comments | 0 | 8 | 38 | 30 | 67 |
Questions Forecasted | 0 | 9 | 71 | 37 | 200 |
Upvotes on Comments By This User | 0 | 2 | 8 | 4 | 33 |
Definitions |



Star Commenter - Mar 2025


Why do you think you're right?
"Trump is negotiating the end of the conflict in Ukraine directly with Russia. NK is directly involved in the conflict, yet the country hasn't been mentioned so far in the talks. THE DIPLOMAT - Any real prospects of reviving the U.N. sanctions regime will require Moscow to recommit to U.N. sanctions β a daunting, perhaps impossible, task. The bigger problem, however, is that neither Trump nor Putin has much incentive to address the North Korea issue. The dilemma is that Putin has few incentives to abandon his new strategic partner, North Korea, and Trump has few incentives to revisit one of his biggest foreign policy failures of his first term. [1] The feeling is probably reciprocal. Putin and Trump don't want to address the NK problem, and KJU doesn't want NK to be addressed at all. In the current context, performing a new nuclear test would serve no purpose other than creating problems for Putin (who is paying handsomely for North Korean supplies of weapons and personnel) and triggering a potential reinvigorated reaction of volatile Trump."
Why might you be wrong?
Deals following through

Why do you think you're right?
Recent ceasefire conversations and Trump's attitude might give the impression that Russia is at an advantage here. But the chances will always be low, as things are being pushed towards a ceasefire quite aggressively, so less motivated reasoning for Russia here.
And then there are other factors like actually verifying it was carried out by Russia ( evident from the previous cases where others suggested " maybe Russia" ).
Good analysis by @Rene here :
"So far, Russia has leaned toward more βold-schoolβ forms of sabotage, often with potentially deadly consequences. But it also has the capability to launch devastating cyberattacks. The challenge will be verifying beyond doubt that it was Russia behind such an attack, rather than another state or non-state actorβthat kind of attribution is notoriously difficult."
Why might you be wrong?
Less known consequences of these trade deals

Why do you think you're right?
Ever since the high of 38%, it has been going down, and things seem to be in control.
Good analysis by @alter_hugo here :
"Egypt's inflation rate seems to be decreasing: the headline inflation rate reached a record high of 38% in September 2023, but has since fallen. Also, the Egyptian pound has remained pretty stable throughout the last year, with a total fluctuation of less than 10%."
There are some other factors which don't seem to have a high correlation as of now, but can cause damages, like the AI bubble, and things seem growing now, but if it falls down the US suffers and it can cause some ripple effect on Egypt
Why might you be wrong?

Why do you think you're right?
The chances of this happening are a bit less, even though efforts from Trump, the gist of the general public was more of how Trump was handling it, and it did alienate some, and not for the very right reasons. USA seems to be in a bit of rush.
But the political situation is a bit messy here, Russia might play advantage to the case here and try to get more things out of here. The scenario of weather can also be taken here, as winter weather can affect them. But given the history of the talks which have happened, and the recent talk, less chances.
Why might you be wrong?
Political turmoil, lack of support from other countries could hinder further

Why do you think you're right?
The chances of this happening are a bit less; even though efforts from Trump, the gist of the general public was more of how Trump was handling it, and it did alienate some, and not for the very right reasons. The USA seems to be in a bit of a rush.
But the political situation is a bit messy here; Russia might play to its advantage in this case and try to get more things out of here. The scenario of weather can also be taken here, as winter weather can affect them. But given the history of the talks that have happened and the recent talk, there are fewer chances.
Why might you be wrong?
Highly dependent on the terms of the deal, hard to say anything here.

Why do you think you're right?
The chances of this happening are a bit less, even though efforts from Trump, the gist of the general public was more of how Trump was handling it, and it did alienate some, and not for the very right reasons. USA seems to be in a bit of rush.
But the political situation is a bit messy here, Russia might play advantage to the case here and try to get more things out of here. The scenario of weather can also be taken here, as winter weather can affect them. But given the history of the talks which have happened, and the recent talk, less chances.
Why might you be wrong?
Political turmoil, lack of support from other countries could hinder further

Why do you think you're right?
Going by past trajectory and cases for the past year, we have the following data :
1) In the current cycle - 39 cases so far - and we plot it an it comes around 80 cases for the time frame in the question
2) For the past 12 months, the numbers stood at 79
So it might fall into one of these 2 bins - between 70 and 79 || between 80 and 89.
Why might you be wrong?
Russian interference given the high number
Why do you think you're right?
With the global landscape shifting towards peace, particularly from Russia and Ukraine's side and with USA involvement - if China goes with this, it can face severe backlash. Another factor which shifts as to is there a need ? - even though with GPU restrictions on China, it was able to smuggle though Singapore, and with Deepseek's emergence, reliance has shifted lesser, and China can use the same playbook it used for dominating EV cars - ByD. If it can't capture the smaller chips layer, it can move towards cases where chips which are a bit bigger but needs fast execution. So less chances overall, both from political situations and technological motivations
Why might you be wrong?
Test time compute growing so might need to shift to specialized chips for reasoning models