date_resolve_at
stringlengths 10
10
| date_begin
stringlengths 10
10
| extracted_urls
stringlengths 2
7.19k
| question_type
stringclasses 3
values | community_predictions
stringlengths 45
72.7k
| url
stringlengths 34
126
| background
stringlengths 1
4.95k
| gpt_3p5_category
stringclasses 11
values | resolution_criteria
stringlengths 43
5.42k
| is_resolved
bool 1
class | date_close
stringlengths 10
10
| question
stringlengths 31
259
| data_source
stringclasses 5
values | resolution
float64 0
1
|
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
2018-01-03 | 2016-12-13 | [] | binary | [["2016-12-13", 0.39], ["2016-12-14", 0.307], ["2016-12-14", 0.278], ["2016-12-14", 0.298], ["2016-12-15", 0.341], ["2016-12-15", 0.347], ["2016-12-18", 0.331], ["2016-12-20", 0.335], ["2016-12-20", 0.335], ["2016-12-21", 0.335], ["2016-12-21", 0.355], ["2016-12-21", 0.364], ["2016-12-22", 0.364], ["2016-12-22", 0.364], ["2016-12-22", 0.383], ["2016-12-25", 0.378], ["2016-12-30", 0.378], ["2017-01-01", 0.378], ["2017-01-02", 0.376], ["2017-01-02", 0.357], ["2017-01-02", 0.357], ["2017-01-03", 0.349], ["2017-01-04", 0.355], ["2017-01-04", 0.363], ["2017-01-05", 0.386], ["2017-01-10", 0.384], ["2017-01-10", 0.385], ["2017-01-13", 0.385], ["2017-02-16", 0.381], ["2017-02-16", 0.379], ["2017-02-18", 0.379], ["2017-02-18", 0.367], ["2017-03-09", 0.374], ["2017-04-18", 0.374], ["2017-05-06", 0.374], ["2017-05-14", 0.378], ["2017-05-20", 0.378], ["2017-05-21", 0.377], ["2017-05-25", 0.377], ["2017-06-09", 0.373], ["2017-06-12", 0.373], ["2017-06-12", 0.365], ["2017-06-19", 0.365], ["2017-06-19", 0.37], ["2017-06-19", 0.367], ["2017-06-23", 0.37], ["2017-06-27", 0.366], ["2017-06-29", 0.362], ["2017-07-05", 0.359], ["2017-07-06", 0.361], ["2017-07-13", 0.358], ["2017-07-18", 0.358], ["2017-07-18", 0.356], ["2017-07-28", 0.357], ["2017-07-29", 0.359], ["2017-08-05", 0.36], ["2017-08-06", 0.355], ["2017-08-06", 0.355], ["2017-08-06", 0.349], ["2017-08-08", 0.344], ["2017-08-08", 0.344], ["2017-08-11", 0.344], ["2017-08-12", 0.344], ["2017-08-14", 0.346], ["2017-08-15", 0.346], ["2017-08-22", 0.339], ["2017-08-31", 0.334], ["2017-09-01", 0.331], ["2017-09-01", 0.331], ["2017-09-03", 0.327], ["2017-09-07", 0.327], ["2017-09-11", 0.324], ["2017-09-12", 0.321], ["2017-09-13", 0.319], ["2017-09-24", 0.32], ["2017-10-02", 0.318], ["2017-10-02", 0.318], ["2017-10-07", 0.319], ["2017-10-16", 0.316], ["2017-10-17", 0.314], ["2017-10-18", 0.314], ["2017-10-18", 0.313], ["2017-10-19", 0.309], ["2017-10-23", 0.311], ["2017-10-28", 0.31], ["2017-10-30", 0.308], ["2017-10-30", 0.305], ["2017-11-01", 0.305], ["2017-11-02", 0.306], ["2017-11-08", 0.305], ["2017-11-09", 0.302], ["2017-11-10", 0.302], ["2017-11-10", 0.303], ["2017-11-12", 0.301], ["2017-11-12", 0.301], ["2017-11-12", 0.304], ["2017-11-13", 0.304], ["2017-11-14", 0.302], ["2017-11-14", 0.302], ["2017-11-14", 0.302], ["2017-11-14", 0.301]] | https://www.metaculus.com/api2/questions/400/ | Amazon has recently launched an "Alexa Prize" competition toward developing an effective "Socialbot" that can "[Engage] customers in a conversation about popular topics such as Entertainment, Fashion, Politics, Sports, and Technology."
Twelve sponsored university teams and some number of additional teams will compete from April until November 2017, using Amazon employees, users, and judges to narrow down to finalists in August, then have a final competition with a 3-judge panel in November.
The best team will win $500K, and there is an additional $1M prize if "their socialbot achieves the grand challenge of conversing coherently and engagingly with humans on popular topics for 20 minutes."
As specified in the FAQ, this is not a Turing test – the winning bot may be readily distinguishable from a human. It should, however, be "human like" in its ability to converse. Details of the judging procedure are in the official rules. In brief, each judge has a "red button" they can press when feel that as a user they would no longer enjoy talking to the bot. | Science & Tech | If and only if the Entrant Team that wins the 2017 Prize has a mean Finals Score equal to 4.0 or higher and maintains a conversation with at least two of the three Interactors for twenty (20) minutes without being stopped by the Judges, Sponsor will provide $1,000,000 U.S. dollars...
so, Will Amazon award the $1M prize?
Resolution will be by announcement by Amazon. | true | 2017-11-15 | Will Amazon award a $1M "Alexa Prize" for a chatbot in 2017? | metaculus | 0 |
2017-02-25 | 2016-12-22 | [] | binary | [["2016-12-23", 0.57], ["2016-12-23", 0.605], ["2016-12-24", 0.673], ["2016-12-24", 0.705], ["2016-12-24", 0.705], ["2016-12-24", 0.726], ["2016-12-25", 0.726], ["2016-12-25", 0.762], ["2016-12-25", 0.726], ["2016-12-25", 0.726], ["2016-12-25", 0.762], ["2016-12-26", 0.74], ["2016-12-26", 0.74], ["2016-12-27", 0.74], ["2016-12-28", 0.727], ["2016-12-30", 0.724], ["2016-12-31", 0.721], ["2017-01-01", 0.714], ["2017-01-01", 0.698], ["2017-01-01", 0.685], ["2017-01-04", 0.664], ["2017-01-05", 0.664], ["2017-01-09", 0.685], ["2017-01-16", 0.682], ["2017-01-19", 0.705], ["2017-01-19", 0.726], ["2017-01-19", 0.726], ["2017-01-19", 0.725], ["2017-01-19", 0.726], ["2017-01-20", 0.741], ["2017-01-20", 0.748], ["2017-01-22", 0.752], ["2017-01-25", 0.752], ["2017-01-26", 0.758], ["2017-01-26", 0.748], ["2017-01-27", 0.748], ["2017-01-27", 0.752], ["2017-01-29", 0.759], ["2017-01-29", 0.744], ["2017-01-29", 0.751], ["2017-02-01", 0.761], ["2017-02-01", 0.757], ["2017-02-05", 0.762], ["2017-02-05", 0.769], ["2017-02-05", 0.77], ["2017-02-05", 0.77], ["2017-02-06", 0.778], ["2017-02-06", 0.786], ["2017-02-07", 0.788], ["2017-02-07", 0.787], ["2017-02-08", 0.789], ["2017-02-08", 0.795], ["2017-02-08", 0.795], ["2017-02-09", 0.795], ["2017-02-14", 0.798], ["2017-02-14", 0.799], ["2017-02-14", 0.797], ["2017-02-15", 0.801], ["2017-02-15", 0.803], ["2017-02-16", 0.803], ["2017-02-23", 0.798], ["2017-02-23", 0.798]] | https://www.metaculus.com/api2/questions/407/ | Not applicable/available for this question. | Science & Tech | The question of whether large-scale quantum effects could be in operation in the brain is quite controversial (see for example this argument that decoherence in the brain is ultra fast and this recent question about slower decoherence). Yet it's clear that quantum mechanics operates in the brain, and that many biological processes may well use quantum effects on the small scale in ways that can effect much larger scales.
As a fascinating example, it has long been known that the human eye/brain system can detect just a few photons of light, and a recent study has quantified this at an unprecedented level. The experimenting team tested the human eye's sensitivity using technology developed in quantum optics and quantum information studies. In conjuncture with psychophysics protocol, they found that the human eyes have the ability to detect the presence of individual photons with a high success rate. The team performed over 30,000 trials with result published in Nature Communications on July 19, 2016.
With such a high-confidence trial, scientists anticipate further testing on humans' ability to directly observe quantum properties via the applied techniques used in the experiment. The findings also raise the question of how biological systems are enabled to attain such sensitivity.
Will this first evidence demonstrating direct perception of a single photon by the human eyes initiate more interest to perform similar testing in the near future?
We will use the number of citations of the paper published in Nature Communications as a measurement. As of quesion open, the paper has been cited by 5 according to Google Scholar. For this question to resolve as positive, Google Scholar must report 10 or more citations by Sept 1, 2017. | true | 2017-05-01 | Seeing single photons: more research to come? | metaculus | 1 |
2017-04-25 | 2016-12-22 | [] | binary | [["2016-12-23", 0.425], ["2016-12-24", 0.31], ["2016-12-24", 0.348], ["2016-12-24", 0.348], ["2016-12-24", 0.336], ["2016-12-24", 0.32], ["2016-12-24", 0.322], ["2016-12-24", 0.32], ["2016-12-24", 0.35], ["2016-12-25", 0.333], ["2016-12-25", 0.35], ["2016-12-26", 0.351], ["2016-12-26", 0.376], ["2016-12-27", 0.376], ["2016-12-29", 0.375], ["2016-12-30", 0.385], ["2016-12-30", 0.385], ["2016-12-30", 0.386], ["2016-12-31", 0.385], ["2017-01-01", 0.408], ["2017-01-01", 0.408], ["2017-01-04", 0.412], ["2017-01-04", 0.441], ["2017-01-09", 0.439], ["2017-01-16", 0.421], ["2017-01-16", 0.421], ["2017-01-16", 0.431], ["2017-01-26", 0.435], ["2017-01-26", 0.437], ["2017-01-27", 0.45], ["2017-02-01", 0.45], ["2017-02-05", 0.459], ["2017-02-14", 0.454], ["2017-02-14", 0.454], ["2017-02-15", 0.467], ["2017-02-16", 0.467], ["2017-02-17", 0.468], ["2017-02-17", 0.468], ["2017-02-17", 0.468], ["2017-02-18", 0.504], ["2017-02-18", 0.504], ["2017-02-18", 0.504], ["2017-02-19", 0.498], ["2017-02-23", 0.497], ["2017-02-23", 0.497], ["2017-02-23", 0.497], ["2017-02-23", 0.497], ["2017-02-23", 0.492], ["2017-02-23", 0.494], ["2017-02-23", 0.494], ["2017-02-23", 0.486], ["2017-02-24", 0.486], ["2017-02-26", 0.471], ["2017-02-27", 0.471], ["2017-03-01", 0.474], ["2017-03-01", 0.474], ["2017-03-05", 0.473], ["2017-03-07", 0.473], ["2017-03-09", 0.471], ["2017-03-09", 0.468], ["2017-03-09", 0.468], ["2017-03-14", 0.468], ["2017-03-15", 0.486], ["2017-03-22", 0.486], ["2017-03-22", 0.487], ["2017-03-22", 0.489], ["2017-03-24", 0.489], ["2017-03-27", 0.496], ["2017-03-28", 0.496], ["2017-03-29", 0.5], ["2017-03-29", 0.508], ["2017-03-30", 0.508], ["2017-03-30", 0.507], ["2017-03-30", 0.508], ["2017-03-30", 0.501], ["2017-03-30", 0.503], ["2017-03-30", 0.504], ["2017-03-30", 0.504], ["2017-03-31", 0.491], ["2017-03-31", 0.495], ["2017-03-31", 0.505], ["2017-03-31", 0.504], ["2017-03-31", 0.508], ["2017-03-31", 0.508], ["2017-03-31", 0.524], ["2017-03-31", 0.524]] | https://www.metaculus.com/api2/questions/408/ | Not applicable/available for this question. | Science & Tech | Astronomers may have observed vacuum birefringence, a quantum effect predicted by the theory of quantum electrodynamics (QED) in the 1930s, by studying light behavior in the highly magnetized empty space around neutron star RX J1856.5-3754.
Ordinary space is generally thought to be empty with no effect on the path travelled by light, but in the presence of strong magnetic fields, a quantum effect can emerge and modify the space, as in the case of this neutron star's strong magnetic fields that permeate its surroundings.
The team submitted their findings (Mignani et al.) to arXiv in Oct 2016, and published their work in the Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society in Nov. 2016.
The researchers analyzed data from the Very Large Telescope (VLT), and found the boosting effect of vacuum birefringence realized in the affected propagation of light in the space around the neutron star.
This is the first direct observational evidence supporting vacuum birefringence effects predicted by QED. The next generation of telescopes, including the European Extremely Large Telescope, will likely participate in future observational tests.
As of this writing, the Mignani et al. paper has not yet been cited by any other studies.
Will there be significant followup work referencing this research?
For the purpose of this question, we will assess via the number of citations of Mignani et al. paper. As of writing no referenced has been made yet, and for this question to resolve as positive, there needs to be a minimum of 10 citations, on or before Nov 1, 2017, per Google Scholar. | true | 2017-04-01 | Vacuum birefringence probably found near neutron stars: more research to come? | metaculus | 1 |
2017-03-01 | 2016-12-22 | [] | binary | [["2016-12-23", 0.33], ["2016-12-23", 0.37], ["2016-12-24", 0.37], ["2016-12-24", 0.315], ["2016-12-24", 0.315], ["2016-12-24", 0.422], ["2016-12-24", 0.435], ["2016-12-24", 0.428], ["2016-12-25", 0.456], ["2016-12-25", 0.414], ["2016-12-25", 0.4], ["2016-12-26", 0.408], ["2016-12-26", 0.39], ["2016-12-27", 0.389], ["2016-12-27", 0.39], ["2016-12-28", 0.404], ["2016-12-29", 0.405], ["2016-12-30", 0.401], ["2016-12-31", 0.401], ["2017-01-01", 0.432], ["2017-01-01", 0.411], ["2017-01-01", 0.411], ["2017-01-01", 0.411], ["2017-01-01", 0.423], ["2017-01-01", 0.426], ["2017-01-01", 0.426], ["2017-01-02", 0.418], ["2017-01-02", 0.422], ["2017-01-03", 0.422], ["2017-01-03", 0.421], ["2017-01-04", 0.416], ["2017-01-04", 0.416], ["2017-01-04", 0.415], ["2017-01-04", 0.402], ["2017-01-04", 0.417], ["2017-01-05", 0.41], ["2017-01-05", 0.413], ["2017-01-08", 0.413], ["2017-01-09", 0.444], ["2017-01-10", 0.439], ["2017-01-11", 0.451], ["2017-01-12", 0.455], ["2017-01-13", 0.456], ["2017-01-16", 0.458], ["2017-01-17", 0.46], ["2017-01-18", 0.461], ["2017-01-18", 0.461], ["2017-01-18", 0.463], ["2017-01-18", 0.464], ["2017-01-19", 0.464], ["2017-01-20", 0.469], ["2017-01-21", 0.469], ["2017-01-21", 0.469], ["2017-01-22", 0.47], ["2017-01-23", 0.473], ["2017-01-24", 0.48], ["2017-01-26", 0.48], ["2017-01-26", 0.47], ["2017-01-26", 0.472], ["2017-01-26", 0.472], ["2017-01-26", 0.472], ["2017-01-27", 0.476], ["2017-01-27", 0.476], ["2017-01-28", 0.476], ["2017-01-28", 0.48], ["2017-01-28", 0.478], ["2017-01-31", 0.478], ["2017-01-31", 0.467]] | https://www.metaculus.com/api2/questions/409/ | Not applicable/available for this question. | Science & Tech | In a recent paper submitted to arXiv, Dutch physicist Erik Verlinde supported the Modified Newtonian Dynamics (MOND) model of gravity, which does not require dark matter, to explain phenomena such as the observed rotational curve of stars.
Two days after Verlinde's submission, on Nov 9, 2016, another paper (S. McGaugh et al.) published in Physical Review Letters. Based on an analysis of 153 galaxies, researchers found that any particular dark matter (halo) model was unnecessary to account for observed radial acceleration, while MOND had anticipated such a result more than three decades ago. As of writing, the McGaugh et al. paper, including its previous preprint version on arXiv, has been cited 13 times, according to Google Scholar.
In this new paradigm of updating MOND theory, researchers' findings offer an alternate view that dark matter, a mainstay of modern astronomy, may be an illusion. Other teams are working to verify such a claim, with one group tweaking galaxy simulations to test if the results are reproducible in comparable galaxies.
Do these papers represent a sustained resurgence in (the relatively small amount of) interest in MOND?
This question will resolve as positive if, by March 1, 2017, Google Scholar shows 50 or more total citations of the McGaugh et al. paper (which had 13 at question launch) and the Verlinde paper (which had 5 at question launch) | true | 2017-02-01 | A resurgence in interest in modified gravity vs. dark matter? | metaculus | 0 |
2017-06-25 | 2016-12-22 | [] | binary | [["2016-12-23", 0.55], ["2016-12-23", 0.44], ["2016-12-23", 0.44], ["2016-12-24", 0.297], ["2016-12-24", 0.325], ["2016-12-24", 0.325], ["2016-12-24", 0.325], ["2016-12-25", 0.31], ["2016-12-25", 0.292], ["2016-12-26", 0.293], ["2016-12-26", 0.293], ["2016-12-27", 0.277], ["2016-12-27", 0.277], ["2016-12-28", 0.26], ["2016-12-29", 0.298], ["2016-12-30", 0.304], ["2016-12-31", 0.302], ["2017-01-01", 0.334], ["2017-01-01", 0.343], ["2017-01-04", 0.352], ["2017-01-04", 0.351], ["2017-01-04", 0.357], ["2017-01-08", 0.357], ["2017-01-09", 0.365], ["2017-01-15", 0.353], ["2017-01-15", 0.354], ["2017-01-15", 0.353], ["2017-01-16", 0.353], ["2017-01-16", 0.362], ["2017-01-22", 0.359], ["2017-01-25", 0.359], ["2017-01-25", 0.387], ["2017-01-26", 0.39], ["2017-01-26", 0.395], ["2017-01-27", 0.4], ["2017-01-27", 0.397], ["2017-01-31", 0.397], ["2017-01-31", 0.39], ["2017-01-31", 0.39], ["2017-01-31", 0.39], ["2017-02-01", 0.39], ["2017-02-05", 0.393], ["2017-02-05", 0.391], ["2017-02-05", 0.377], ["2017-02-05", 0.377], ["2017-02-14", 0.378], ["2017-02-14", 0.374], ["2017-02-16", 0.373], ["2017-02-17", 0.373], ["2017-02-17", 0.373], ["2017-02-18", 0.354], ["2017-02-18", 0.354], ["2017-02-18", 0.353], ["2017-02-18", 0.353], ["2017-02-18", 0.351], ["2017-02-19", 0.353], ["2017-02-21", 0.358], ["2017-02-23", 0.358], ["2017-02-24", 0.351], ["2017-02-26", 0.351], ["2017-02-26", 0.35], ["2017-02-27", 0.345], ["2017-03-01", 0.345], ["2017-03-01", 0.338], ["2017-03-01", 0.336], ["2017-03-01", 0.333]] | https://www.metaculus.com/api2/questions/410/ | Not applicable/available for this question. | Science & Tech | The Breakthrough Listen project, together with SETI, is now investigating odd pulsating light signals observed by astronomers from Laval University, who suggest the signals may originate from extraterrestrial civilizations. Of the 2.5 million stars in the Sloan Digital Sky Survey, the team claimed that 234 of them exhibit characteristics identical to that of the Extraterrestrial Intelligence (ETI) signal predicted by the same group in a previous publication in 2012.
Due to the study's controversial conclusions, many are criticizing their report, noting a high likelihood that the observed anomalies may be results of human error, rather than signals emitted by ET.
The claim of ETI detection, as an international protocol, requires an exhaustive evaluation of all other possible natural explanations before drawing any conclusions. Independent verifications are required with at least two or more telescopes.
The authors have not ruled out other potential explanations, and speculate that the mysterious signal could be due to "highly peculiar chemical compositions in a small fraction of galactic halo stars." But their data came from a small number of stars, centered around the Sun, which have a very narrow spectral range.
Currently, the discovery has, according to some commentators, a score of 0 to 1 on the Rio Scale, a ranking system used to evaluate the significance of any observed extraterrestrial phenomena, with 10 signifying a valid and important discovery.
Will Borra et al. paper get at least 10 citations in the coming months?
The Borra et al. paper was submitted on October 10th, 2016 to arXiv, and was published on October 14th, 2016 by Publications of the Astronomical Society of the Pacific (PASP). There is one citation of it thus far, according to Google Scholar.
This question will resolve positively if, per Google Scholar, a minimum of 10 citations is listed by July 15th, 2017. | true | 2017-03-01 | How will recent claims of 234 SETI signals in SDSS data be treated by the community? | metaculus | 0 |
2018-01-03 | 2016-12-28 | [] | binary | [["2016-12-28", 0.15], ["2016-12-28", 0.362], ["2016-12-28", 0.382], ["2016-12-29", 0.396], ["2016-12-29", 0.431], ["2016-12-30", 0.445], ["2016-12-30", 0.445], ["2016-12-31", 0.421], ["2017-01-01", 0.425], ["2017-01-01", 0.439], ["2017-01-02", 0.45], ["2017-01-06", 0.459], ["2017-01-06", 0.472], ["2017-01-17", 0.472], ["2017-01-18", 0.474], ["2017-01-24", 0.487], ["2017-01-24", 0.485], ["2017-01-26", 0.485], ["2017-01-27", 0.495], ["2017-01-30", 0.495], ["2017-02-01", 0.501], ["2017-02-03", 0.501], ["2017-02-03", 0.501], ["2017-02-05", 0.498], ["2017-02-06", 0.5], ["2017-02-06", 0.5], ["2017-02-16", 0.5], ["2017-02-19", 0.503], ["2017-02-19", 0.503], ["2017-02-21", 0.501], ["2017-02-21", 0.501], ["2017-02-23", 0.501], ["2017-02-23", 0.514], ["2017-02-23", 0.536], ["2017-02-27", 0.536], ["2017-02-28", 0.54], ["2017-03-09", 0.54], ["2017-03-10", 0.54], ["2017-03-10", 0.541], ["2017-03-10", 0.545], ["2017-03-14", 0.549], ["2017-03-30", 0.549], ["2017-03-30", 0.556], ["2017-04-01", 0.556], ["2017-04-01", 0.562], ["2017-04-01", 0.562], ["2017-04-04", 0.569], ["2017-04-09", 0.569], ["2017-04-10", 0.572], ["2017-04-10", 0.576], ["2017-04-10", 0.569], ["2017-04-11", 0.57], ["2017-04-11", 0.57], ["2017-04-12", 0.57], ["2017-04-13", 0.581], ["2017-04-16", 0.581], ["2017-04-20", 0.588], ["2017-05-01", 0.588], ["2017-05-03", 0.59], ["2017-05-08", 0.59], ["2017-05-09", 0.597], ["2017-05-14", 0.597], ["2017-05-14", 0.597], ["2017-05-20", 0.601], ["2017-05-20", 0.61], ["2017-05-20", 0.616], ["2017-05-20", 0.618], ["2017-05-21", 0.621], ["2017-05-28", 0.623], ["2017-05-28", 0.624], ["2017-05-29", 0.625], ["2017-05-30", 0.625], ["2017-06-02", 0.63], ["2017-06-03", 0.63], ["2017-06-03", 0.63], ["2017-06-07", 0.635], ["2017-06-09", 0.638], ["2017-06-12", 0.638], ["2017-06-14", 0.641], ["2017-06-14", 0.64], ["2017-06-15", 0.64], ["2017-06-15", 0.641], ["2017-06-16", 0.643], ["2017-06-18", 0.643], ["2017-06-19", 0.646], ["2017-06-19", 0.646], ["2017-06-20", 0.649], ["2017-06-22", 0.651], ["2017-06-22", 0.648], ["2017-06-23", 0.648], ["2017-06-23", 0.648], ["2017-06-24", 0.649], ["2017-06-28", 0.649], ["2017-06-28", 0.651], ["2017-06-28", 0.65], ["2017-06-29", 0.649], ["2017-06-29", 0.649], ["2017-06-29", 0.653], ["2017-06-29", 0.647], ["2017-06-30", 0.652], ["2017-06-30", 0.645]] | https://www.metaculus.com/api2/questions/411/ | Not applicable/available for this question. | Economics & Business | From looking at a list of predictions by major banks, it would appear that there is a high degree of consensus and a low degree of uncertainty regarding where the US stock market will stand at the end of 2017. The median S&P 500 index prediction from these prognosticators for a year from now is 2,325, with a low estimate of 2,300 and a high estimate of 2,450. These predictions conform to the usual situation in which stock market forecasters are generally bullish and often wrong.
At the close of trading on December 27, 2016, the S&P 500 index (as measured by CME-traded near-month E-mini prices) stood near its all-time high of 2,277 set a few days prior, making it quite likely that the market will finish 2016 solidly in the black. Indeed, during the course of the Obama presidency, Wall Street has had an extraordinary run. After hitting an ominously suggestive intraday low of 666 on March 9th, 2009, a few weeks into Obama's first term, the index has turned in a 340% gain. This performance conforms to the observation that historically, the stock market has done substantially better during Democratic administrations. (Since Herbert Hoover, the average annualized 4-year return during Republican administrations was under 2%, whereas the average annualized 4-year return during Democratic administrations was nearly 11%). This paper from the Federal Reserve emphasizes the ever-salient caution to not conflate correlation with causation.
That said, will the S&P 500, as measured by the last traded price of 2017 of the CME E-Mini March 2018 Futures contract, stand above 2,250 at the close of 2017? | true | 2017-06-30 | Will 2017 be an up year from the US Stock Market? | metaculus | 1 |
2018-01-03 | 2017-01-06 | [] | binary | [["2017-01-08", 0.33], ["2017-01-10", 0.222], ["2017-01-11", 0.222], ["2017-01-12", 0.217], ["2017-01-14", 0.206], ["2017-01-21", 0.214], ["2017-01-22", 0.21], ["2017-01-25", 0.21], ["2017-01-25", 0.201], ["2017-01-29", 0.201], ["2017-02-05", 0.191], ["2017-02-07", 0.187], ["2017-02-09", 0.195], ["2017-02-11", 0.193], ["2017-02-15", 0.193], ["2017-03-12", 0.209], ["2017-03-13", 0.193], ["2017-04-09", 0.193], ["2017-04-11", 0.185], ["2017-04-12", 0.178], ["2017-04-13", 0.175], ["2017-04-29", 0.174], ["2017-05-08", 0.171], ["2017-05-12", 0.168], ["2017-05-12", 0.165], ["2017-05-14", 0.163], ["2017-05-20", 0.161], ["2017-05-22", 0.159], ["2017-05-24", 0.168], ["2017-05-25", 0.162], ["2017-05-27", 0.161], ["2017-05-28", 0.157], ["2017-05-29", 0.156], ["2017-05-31", 0.166], ["2017-05-31", 0.188], ["2017-06-24", 0.188], ["2017-06-29", 0.185], ["2017-06-30", 0.182], ["2017-07-01", 0.179], ["2017-07-08", 0.177], ["2017-07-11", 0.178], ["2017-07-14", 0.178], ["2017-07-18", 0.174], ["2017-07-18", 0.174], ["2017-07-21", 0.173], ["2017-08-01", 0.171], ["2017-08-03", 0.17], ["2017-08-04", 0.145], ["2017-08-06", 0.138], ["2017-08-07", 0.136], ["2017-08-09", 0.132], ["2017-08-12", 0.13], ["2017-08-14", 0.129], ["2017-08-22", 0.128], ["2017-08-24", 0.125], ["2017-08-27", 0.124], ["2017-08-28", 0.126], ["2017-08-29", 0.126], ["2017-08-30", 0.124], ["2017-09-01", 0.124], ["2017-09-15", 0.123], ["2017-09-20", 0.121], ["2017-09-23", 0.121], ["2017-09-30", 0.12], ["2017-10-01", 0.119], ["2017-10-02", 0.116], ["2017-10-09", 0.115], ["2017-10-11", 0.114], ["2017-10-12", 0.113], ["2017-10-14", 0.113], ["2017-10-23", 0.112], ["2017-10-24", 0.109], ["2017-11-03", 0.109], ["2017-11-04", 0.108], ["2017-11-06", 0.104], ["2017-11-09", 0.104], ["2017-11-10", 0.104], ["2017-11-12", 0.104], ["2017-11-14", 0.102], ["2017-11-15", 0.103], ["2017-11-19", 0.103], ["2017-11-20", 0.102], ["2017-11-26", 0.102], ["2017-11-27", 0.101], ["2017-11-29", 0.1], ["2017-12-01", 0.099], ["2017-12-04", 0.098], ["2017-12-06", 0.096], ["2017-12-08", 0.095], ["2017-12-11", 0.095], ["2017-12-12", 0.094], ["2017-12-13", 0.093], ["2017-12-18", 0.093], ["2017-12-19", 0.093], ["2017-12-21", 0.09], ["2017-12-22", 0.089], ["2017-12-25", 0.089], ["2017-12-26", 0.088], ["2017-12-29", 0.087], ["2017-12-31", 0.087], ["2017-12-31", 0.086]] | https://www.metaculus.com/api2/questions/416/ | Not applicable/available for this question. | Science & Tech | The game of Go originated in China over 2,500 years ago. While similar to chess in many ways, Go is much more minimalist in its ruleset and more esoteric in strategy. The aspect of pattern recognition and the huge state space of possible moves in Go (vastly greater than chess) has traditionally challenged computers, and has made it an excellent metric for the capabilities of artifical intelligence.
The last several years have seen stunning advances by artificial Go contestants. Google's AlphaGo program has seen particular success. After sealing a stunning 4-1 victory over Go grandmaster Lee Sedol, an updated version of Alphago, playing in online forums using the account name 'Master', has swept through the Go field, defeating nearly all of the world’s top players in the course of 60 online matches without registering a single loss.
Will a human Go player beat AlphaGo (or one of its publicly revealed aliases) in one or more single tournament games, based on the currently established Go rules, during 2017? | true | 2017-12-31 | Will a human beat AlphaGo in 2017? | metaculus | 0 |
2017-03-01 | 2017-01-11 | [] | binary | [["2017-01-25", 0.59], ["2017-01-25", 0.59], ["2017-01-25", 0.617], ["2017-01-25", 0.562], ["2017-01-25", 0.562], ["2017-01-26", 0.61], ["2017-01-26", 0.597], ["2017-01-26", 0.597], ["2017-01-26", 0.562], ["2017-01-27", 0.574], ["2017-01-27", 0.565], ["2017-01-27", 0.565], ["2017-01-29", 0.545], ["2017-01-29", 0.559], ["2017-01-29", 0.524], ["2017-01-31", 0.522], ["2017-01-31", 0.507], ["2017-01-31", 0.505], ["2017-01-31", 0.505], ["2017-01-31", 0.505], ["2017-02-01", 0.505], ["2017-02-02", 0.502], ["2017-02-02", 0.502], ["2017-02-02", 0.502], ["2017-02-02", 0.511], ["2017-02-02", 0.511], ["2017-02-03", 0.508], ["2017-02-03", 0.502], ["2017-02-04", 0.483], ["2017-02-05", 0.48], ["2017-02-05", 0.492], ["2017-02-06", 0.488], ["2017-02-06", 0.488], ["2017-02-06", 0.488], ["2017-02-07", 0.472], ["2017-02-08", 0.472], ["2017-02-08", 0.468], ["2017-02-09", 0.468], ["2017-02-09", 0.462], ["2017-02-09", 0.454], ["2017-02-10", 0.445], ["2017-02-11", 0.442], ["2017-02-11", 0.442], ["2017-02-12", 0.437], ["2017-02-12", 0.431], ["2017-02-12", 0.431], ["2017-02-13", 0.418], ["2017-02-13", 0.418], ["2017-02-13", 0.416], ["2017-02-13", 0.415], ["2017-02-13", 0.414], ["2017-02-13", 0.413], ["2017-02-13", 0.411], ["2017-02-13", 0.406], ["2017-02-13", 0.404], ["2017-02-14", 0.401], ["2017-02-14", 0.396], ["2017-02-14", 0.394], ["2017-02-15", 0.389], ["2017-02-15", 0.385], ["2017-02-15", 0.382]] | https://www.metaculus.com/api2/questions/419/ | Not applicable/available for this question. | Politics & Governance | President Trump, along with leadership in both congressional houses, have repeatedly called for a repeal of the Affordable Care Act (ACA). It is unclear whether such a repeal would replace the law with a new system or simply "revert" to standing law prior to the ACA, perhaps after some time delay for development of a replacement.
Will legislation to repeal the Affordable Care be signed into law before midnight EST on March 1, 2017?
Resolution satisfied if legislation is signed that repeals, revoked, or changes major provisions of the ACA, and which is generally termed a "repeal" of the ACA by Trump and others. | true | 2017-02-15 | Will the Affordable Care Act be repealed before March 1, 2017? | metaculus | 0 |
2023-01-01 | 2017-01-12 | ["https://astronomy.com/news/2018/09/two-stars-will-not-merge-and-explode-into-red-fury-in-2022"] | binary | [["2017-01-18", 0.88], ["2017-01-18", 0.495], ["2017-01-18", 0.613], ["2017-01-18", 0.613], ["2017-01-18", 0.658], ["2017-01-19", 0.698], ["2017-01-19", 0.693], ["2017-01-20", 0.672], ["2017-01-20", 0.678], ["2017-01-20", 0.648], ["2017-01-21", 0.633], ["2017-01-22", 0.639], ["2017-01-22", 0.639], ["2017-01-23", 0.64], ["2017-01-24", 0.678], ["2017-01-26", 0.683], ["2017-01-26", 0.678], ["2017-01-27", 0.678], ["2017-02-01", 0.651], ["2017-02-01", 0.662], ["2017-02-04", 0.662], ["2017-02-05", 0.664], ["2017-02-06", 0.664], ["2017-02-08", 0.661], ["2017-02-09", 0.663], ["2017-02-15", 0.642], ["2017-02-23", 0.645], ["2017-05-08", 0.658], ["2017-05-14", 0.657], ["2017-05-14", 0.657], ["2017-05-18", 0.655], ["2017-05-21", 0.624], ["2017-05-25", 0.606], ["2017-06-02", 0.606], ["2017-06-02", 0.608], ["2017-06-09", 0.607], ["2017-07-18", 0.607], ["2017-07-26", 0.59], ["2017-07-29", 0.59], ["2017-08-05", 0.589], ["2017-08-05", 0.588], ["2017-08-07", 0.588], ["2017-08-07", 0.592], ["2017-08-12", 0.592], ["2017-08-27", 0.592], ["2017-09-24", 0.593], ["2017-10-08", 0.592], ["2017-11-21", 0.591], ["2017-11-22", 0.589], ["2017-11-23", 0.59], ["2017-11-23", 0.592], ["2017-11-24", 0.591], ["2017-11-29", 0.591], ["2017-12-06", 0.592], ["2017-12-07", 0.593], ["2017-12-07", 0.593], ["2017-12-15", 0.594], ["2017-12-25", 0.594], ["2017-12-31", 0.595], ["2017-12-31", 0.597]] | https://www.metaculus.com/api2/questions/420/ | Not applicable/available for this question. | Science & Tech | In 2017, a team of astronomers predicted (technical paper) that the binary stars KIC 9832227 will spiral in and collide in the year 2022.2, plus or minus 0.6. They predict that the result will be a "luminous red nova", a type of nova produced by star collisions. News reports say it could be the brightest object in the night sky! However, whether we actually see it in the night sky will depend on the time of year.
Greg Egan wrote:
Given that nobody knows exactly when this will happen, the main thing that determines how many people are likely to be able to see it is the declination, 46° N. So anyone in the northern hemisphere will have a good chance ... while for someone like me, at 31° S, the odds aren't great: it will never rise higher than 13° above the northern horizon, for me.
Right ascension is the celestial equivalent of longitude, but without knowing the season in advance (and the error bars on the current prediction are much too large for that) we can't tell if the sun will be too close to the object, drowning it in daylight to the naked eye.
If that happens, I guess the only comfort is that there are still sure to be telescopes able to make observations, maybe including both Hubble and James Webb.
So, will there be a Nova from KIC 9832227?
Resolution is positive if a Nova at the location of KIC 9832227 reaches at least visual magnitude 6 (barely visible) during the calendar year of 2021 or 2022. (So the question is addressing primarily whether it will happen, rather than when.) | true | 2018-01-01 | Will KIC 9832227 become a nova by 2023? | metaculus | 0 |
2017-02-23 | 2017-01-13 | [] | binary | [["2017-01-13", 0.3], ["2017-01-13", 0.3], ["2017-01-13", 0.2], ["2017-01-13", 0.2], ["2017-01-14", 0.184], ["2017-01-14", 0.213], ["2017-01-14", 0.203], ["2017-01-16", 0.228], ["2017-01-16", 0.209], ["2017-01-16", 0.209], ["2017-01-17", 0.203], ["2017-01-17", 0.203], ["2017-01-17", 0.203], ["2017-01-17", 0.203], ["2017-01-17", 0.226], ["2017-01-17", 0.224], ["2017-01-18", 0.217], ["2017-01-18", 0.217], ["2017-01-18", 0.214], ["2017-01-21", 0.213], ["2017-01-22", 0.213], ["2017-01-22", 0.209], ["2017-01-22", 0.211], ["2017-01-22", 0.211], ["2017-01-23", 0.205], ["2017-01-23", 0.205], ["2017-01-24", 0.191], ["2017-01-24", 0.191], ["2017-01-26", 0.192], ["2017-01-27", 0.202], ["2017-01-27", 0.202], ["2017-01-31", 0.207]] | https://www.metaculus.com/api2/questions/421/ | Not applicable/available for this question. | Politics & Governance | Although no legislation regarding artificial intelligence appears to be on the immediate horizon in the US (see pertinent question), this may not be the case in the EU. Per This Guardian article (among other reports), a proposed European Parliament motion would include a number of provisions including a call to:
Create a European agency for robotics and AI,
Consider granting highly capable AIs and robots "personhood" status (akin to corporate personhood),
Create an advisory code of conduct for AI and robotic engineers,
Create a mandatory insurance scheme to cover damages done by autonomous agents.
The text of the proposal can be found here. According to the above Guardian article,
The full house of the European Parliament will vote on the draft proposals in February, which will need to be approved by absolute majority.
Will a resolution substantially resembling this proposed resolution be passed by the European parliament in 2017?
Resolution is positive if a majority vote of the European parliament is taken in favor of this or a very similar proposal in by end of 2017. | true | 2017-02-01 | Will the European Parliament pass rules granting AI personhood, among other provisions? | metaculus | 1 |
2018-06-05 | 2017-01-24 | [] | binary | [["2017-01-25", 0.12], ["2017-01-25", 0.275], ["2017-01-25", 0.275], ["2017-01-25", 0.24], ["2017-01-25", 0.24], ["2017-01-25", 0.368], ["2017-01-26", 0.312], ["2017-01-26", 0.31], ["2017-01-26", 0.326], ["2017-01-26", 0.334], ["2017-01-26", 0.316], ["2017-01-27", 0.322], ["2017-01-27", 0.328], ["2017-01-28", 0.328], ["2017-01-31", 0.359], ["2017-01-31", 0.375], ["2017-02-05", 0.375], ["2017-02-06", 0.381], ["2017-02-09", 0.402], ["2017-02-09", 0.406], ["2017-02-15", 0.418], ["2017-02-18", 0.418], ["2017-02-20", 0.418], ["2017-02-23", 0.433], ["2017-03-20", 0.434], ["2017-03-20", 0.433], ["2017-03-20", 0.43], ["2017-04-01", 0.423], ["2017-04-13", 0.413], ["2017-04-13", 0.411], ["2017-04-14", 0.406], ["2017-04-26", 0.415], ["2017-04-27", 0.411], ["2017-05-08", 0.396], ["2017-05-12", 0.385], ["2017-05-14", 0.387], ["2017-05-21", 0.387], ["2017-05-25", 0.383], ["2017-05-27", 0.385], ["2017-05-27", 0.379], ["2017-06-05", 0.381], ["2017-06-08", 0.378], ["2017-06-09", 0.379], ["2017-06-12", 0.378], ["2017-06-14", 0.382], ["2017-06-14", 0.382], ["2017-06-14", 0.378], ["2017-06-19", 0.369], ["2017-06-19", 0.369], ["2017-06-20", 0.37], ["2017-06-29", 0.37], ["2017-06-30", 0.375], ["2017-06-30", 0.378], ["2017-06-30", 0.379], ["2017-06-30", 0.371], ["2017-06-30", 0.37], ["2017-06-30", 0.37]] | https://www.metaculus.com/api2/questions/425/ | Not applicable/available for this question. | Science & Tech | According to the official website, five finalists have been chosen in the Google Lunar X-Prize, which is a challenge to successfully send an operating vehicle that lands on the moon, travels 500 meters, and returns images to Earth.
Will the $20 million X-prize be awarded for a mission launched in 2017?
Resolution by official announcement by the X-prize foundation. Prize must be awarded by June 1, 2018.
(Edited 3/20/17 to extend prize award date to mid-2018 to accommodate mission length and delays between mission and award.) | true | 2017-07-01 | Winner in 2017 of the Lunar X-prize? | metaculus | 0 |
2020-07-18 | 2017-01-30 | [] | binary | [["2017-01-31", 0.065], ["2017-01-31", 0.077], ["2017-01-31", 0.108], ["2017-01-31", 0.118], ["2017-01-31", 0.118], ["2017-01-31", 0.118], ["2017-02-01", 0.182], ["2017-02-01", 0.169], ["2017-02-01", 0.168], ["2017-02-02", 0.168], ["2017-02-02", 0.168], ["2017-02-02", 0.168], ["2017-02-02", 0.179], ["2017-02-02", 0.179], ["2017-02-05", 0.173], ["2017-02-05", 0.171], ["2017-02-06", 0.163], ["2017-02-09", 0.177], ["2017-02-10", 0.177], ["2017-02-15", 0.175], ["2017-02-24", 0.175], ["2017-02-24", 0.173], ["2017-02-25", 0.168], ["2017-02-26", 0.161], ["2017-02-26", 0.161], ["2017-03-06", 0.164], ["2017-03-13", 0.164], ["2017-03-13", 0.168], ["2017-04-01", 0.168], ["2017-04-14", 0.164], ["2017-05-08", 0.158], ["2017-05-12", 0.164], ["2017-05-14", 0.169], ["2017-05-18", 0.167], ["2017-05-20", 0.167], ["2017-05-20", 0.165], ["2017-05-21", 0.161], ["2017-05-22", 0.162], ["2017-06-01", 0.16], ["2017-06-05", 0.157], ["2017-06-07", 0.157], ["2017-06-07", 0.162], ["2017-06-09", 0.162], ["2017-06-10", 0.162], ["2017-06-11", 0.162], ["2017-06-12", 0.165], ["2017-06-14", 0.163], ["2017-06-14", 0.162], ["2017-06-14", 0.162], ["2017-06-14", 0.162], ["2017-06-15", 0.155], ["2017-06-15", 0.152], ["2017-06-15", 0.152], ["2017-06-15", 0.149], ["2017-06-15", 0.159], ["2017-06-15", 0.16]] | https://www.metaculus.com/api2/questions/427/ | Not applicable/available for this question. | Science & Tech | Solid metallic hydrogen has apparently been recently created in the lab. If verified (see some doubts raised here), this could be a big deal (see accompanying question on citations), as the substance has been theorized for decades and may have very interesting properties.
Along with superconductivity (see accompanying question), a key issue is whether solid metallic hydrogen will be metastable at room temperature, i.e. stay in the same form even when the ultra-high pressure is released. The researchers apparently plan to test this after doing as many other tests as possible on their sample.
Will a solid metallic hydrogen be metastable at room temperature?
Resolution is positive if by Jan 1, 2020 a credible preprint or published paper reports that (a) solid metallic hydrogen has been created (by the Harvard group or another), and (b) remains stable at > 0 centigrade and < 2 atm of pressure for > 1 hour. | true | 2017-06-15 | Is solid metallic hydrogen metastable at room temperature? | metaculus | 0 |
2017-03-27 | 2017-02-01 | [] | binary | [["2017-02-01", 0.76], ["2017-02-02", 0.675], ["2017-02-02", 0.643], ["2017-02-02", 0.643], ["2017-02-03", 0.712], ["2017-02-03", 0.678], ["2017-02-04", 0.67], ["2017-02-05", 0.67], ["2017-02-05", 0.696], ["2017-02-05", 0.705], ["2017-02-09", 0.693], ["2017-02-09", 0.682], ["2017-02-09", 0.682], ["2017-02-15", 0.656], ["2017-02-17", 0.656], ["2017-02-18", 0.684], ["2017-02-18", 0.684], ["2017-02-20", 0.691], ["2017-02-20", 0.691], ["2017-02-20", 0.694], ["2017-02-21", 0.687], ["2017-02-21", 0.687], ["2017-02-23", 0.687], ["2017-02-23", 0.692], ["2017-02-23", 0.711], ["2017-02-23", 0.705], ["2017-02-24", 0.704], ["2017-02-26", 0.706], ["2017-02-26", 0.707], ["2017-02-26", 0.707], ["2017-03-04", 0.708], ["2017-03-06", 0.708], ["2017-03-06", 0.703], ["2017-03-06", 0.703], ["2017-03-06", 0.703], ["2017-03-13", 0.703], ["2017-03-13", 0.708], ["2017-03-14", 0.708], ["2017-03-15", 0.713]] | https://www.metaculus.com/api2/questions/429/ | Not applicable/available for this question. | Economics & Business | The Case-Schiller 20-city composite housing index is a well-reference tracker of US home prices.
Published monthly, the index was (arguably) in decline from its inception in late 2006 until mid 2012. Since then it has seen a steady rise (underlying seasonal fluctuations) from a low of 134, to 192 as of November 2016.
This question addresses whether this upward trend will continue, or whether we'll enter into a new decline. As a specific criterion, we'll ask:
Will the high point of the 20-city Case-Schiller index in 2017 be higher than that in 2016?
Resolution is positive if the highest reported value of the index for 2017 (likely reported in winter 2018) exceeds the highest of 2016 (which in turn would be at least 192.14). | true | 2017-12-01 | Higher US housing prices in 2017? | metaculus | 1 |
2017-03-30 | 2017-02-03 | [] | binary | [["2017-02-03", 0.83], ["2017-02-04", 0.79], ["2017-02-04", 0.79], ["2017-02-04", 0.743], ["2017-02-04", 0.814], ["2017-02-04", 0.814], ["2017-02-04", 0.778], ["2017-02-04", 0.786], ["2017-02-04", 0.808], ["2017-02-05", 0.811], ["2017-02-05", 0.797], ["2017-02-05", 0.793], ["2017-02-05", 0.801], ["2017-02-06", 0.78], ["2017-02-06", 0.78], ["2017-02-06", 0.78], ["2017-02-07", 0.785], ["2017-02-07", 0.802], ["2017-02-08", 0.792], ["2017-02-08", 0.798], ["2017-02-08", 0.789], ["2017-02-08", 0.789], ["2017-02-09", 0.795], ["2017-02-09", 0.79], ["2017-02-09", 0.795], ["2017-02-10", 0.797], ["2017-02-12", 0.797], ["2017-02-13", 0.797], ["2017-02-14", 0.802], ["2017-02-14", 0.802], ["2017-02-15", 0.803], ["2017-02-16", 0.801], ["2017-02-16", 0.798], ["2017-02-16", 0.799], ["2017-02-16", 0.792], ["2017-02-17", 0.788], ["2017-02-18", 0.794], ["2017-02-18", 0.794], ["2017-02-18", 0.788], ["2017-02-19", 0.788], ["2017-02-19", 0.787], ["2017-02-21", 0.787], ["2017-02-23", 0.785], ["2017-02-23", 0.785], ["2017-02-23", 0.784], ["2017-02-23", 0.776], ["2017-02-24", 0.778], ["2017-02-26", 0.777], ["2017-02-28", 0.777]] | https://www.metaculus.com/api2/questions/430/ | Not applicable/available for this question. | Politics & Governance | In the aftermath of the Brexit vote, the world wondered "What happens next?" The vote, although a referendum vote to assess the will of the people, did not by itself cause the UK to leave the European Union. The mechanism for doing so is Article 50 of the Treaty on European Union, and Brexit does not formally begin until that article is triggered.
The Article states that any EU member country can decide to leave the Union by formally notifying the European Council. Upon notification, the exiting country commences a two-year period of negotiation to, in essence, re-negotiate the country's new relationship with the rest of the EU. The final agreement must be ratified by the European Council, in consultation with the European Parliament.
Triggering Article 50 is risky by design, however. If the agreement is not ratified within the two-year timeframe, the exiting country goes away empty-handed, with regards to formal relationships with the remaining EU countries.
UK Prime Minister Theresa May has said that she will trigger Article 50 by the end of March 2017. Although a ruling by the Supreme Court of the United Kingdom requires that May secure Parliamentary approval to proceed, a preliminary vote in Feb. 2017 showed strong support, likely clearing the way for May to trigger Article 50.
Will Brexit proceed as planned, with notice served to the European Council under Article 50, by the end of March 2017?
This question will resolve as positive if a credible news outlet reports that Article 50 has been formally triggered by the United Kingdom on or before March 31, 2017. | true | 2017-03-01 | Article 50 triggered by UK by end of March 2017? | metaculus | 1 |
2018-12-20 | 2017-02-08 | [] | binary | [["2017-02-09", 0.835], ["2017-02-12", 0.677], ["2017-02-15", 0.645], ["2017-02-24", 0.625], ["2017-02-27", 0.594], ["2017-03-01", 0.603], ["2017-03-04", 0.589], ["2017-03-06", 0.607], ["2017-03-07", 0.607], ["2017-03-13", 0.616], ["2017-03-29", 0.612], ["2017-03-31", 0.609], ["2017-04-01", 0.609], ["2017-04-13", 0.604], ["2017-04-17", 0.609], ["2017-04-19", 0.616], ["2017-05-08", 0.616], ["2017-05-14", 0.628], ["2017-05-21", 0.629], ["2017-05-24", 0.633], ["2017-05-26", 0.638], ["2017-05-28", 0.637], ["2017-06-02", 0.637], ["2017-06-04", 0.628], ["2017-06-05", 0.622], ["2017-06-09", 0.622], ["2017-06-12", 0.622], ["2017-06-13", 0.625], ["2017-06-26", 0.623], ["2017-06-29", 0.623], ["2017-07-04", 0.63], ["2017-07-07", 0.655], ["2017-07-17", 0.655], ["2017-07-18", 0.638], ["2017-07-20", 0.637], ["2017-07-21", 0.64], ["2017-07-28", 0.638], ["2017-07-30", 0.651], ["2017-08-01", 0.667], ["2017-08-03", 0.666], ["2017-08-05", 0.682], ["2017-08-06", 0.685], ["2017-08-08", 0.686], ["2017-08-10", 0.683], ["2017-08-12", 0.683], ["2017-08-14", 0.689], ["2017-08-16", 0.689], ["2017-08-18", 0.689], ["2017-08-24", 0.69], ["2017-08-27", 0.692], ["2017-08-29", 0.693], ["2017-08-31", 0.702], ["2017-09-03", 0.704], ["2017-09-04", 0.706], ["2017-09-07", 0.706], ["2017-09-09", 0.707], ["2017-09-10", 0.708], ["2017-09-19", 0.708], ["2017-09-20", 0.711], ["2017-10-02", 0.708], ["2017-10-05", 0.708], ["2017-10-07", 0.707], ["2017-10-08", 0.706], ["2017-10-10", 0.706], ["2017-11-17", 0.705], ["2017-11-18", 0.703], ["2017-11-21", 0.704], ["2017-11-28", 0.704], ["2017-11-30", 0.701], ["2017-12-02", 0.71], ["2017-12-04", 0.707], ["2017-12-06", 0.705], ["2017-12-08", 0.704], ["2017-12-12", 0.704], ["2017-12-16", 0.704], ["2017-12-16", 0.704], ["2017-12-30", 0.704], ["2017-12-31", 0.706], ["2018-01-03", 0.706], ["2018-01-05", 0.707], ["2018-01-08", 0.707], ["2018-01-09", 0.709], ["2018-01-14", 0.709], ["2018-01-16", 0.705], ["2018-01-18", 0.706], ["2018-01-21", 0.706], ["2018-01-25", 0.707], ["2018-01-28", 0.704], ["2018-01-30", 0.703], ["2018-02-01", 0.699], ["2018-02-02", 0.697], ["2018-02-04", 0.696], ["2018-02-06", 0.697], ["2018-02-08", 0.697], ["2018-02-12", 0.695], ["2018-02-14", 0.693], ["2018-02-16", 0.691], ["2018-02-18", 0.69], ["2018-02-21", 0.693], ["2018-02-23", 0.692], ["2018-02-25", 0.69]] | https://www.metaculus.com/api2/questions/432/ | Not applicable/available for this question. | Security & Defense | 2017 began with an assertion by North Korean leader Kim Jong Un that his military was ready to test-launch an intercontinental ballistic missile (ICBM) at "any time, any place." South Korean observers confirmed that such a launch may be imminent.
ICBMs are typically defined as capable of traveling more than 5,500 km (3,400 mi). Missiles with shorter ranges are defined as intermediate-range ballistic missiles, the category in which North Korea's successfully-tested Musudan missile falls.
Early development of ICBMs by the United States and Russia paralleled the space race, since the same missiles in development to deliver nuclear warheads were also used as launch vehicles in the Mercury and Gemini programs and in the Russian counterparts of the same programs.
North Korea's Taepodong rocket, with a range up to 6,000 km, has similarly been used for space launches, although it's unlikely this rocket was designed to carry a nuclear warhead. Instead, North Korea's two ICBMs possibly in development are the KN-08 and the longer-range KN-14.
An ICBM test is likely to have international consequences, particularly in light of U.S. President Donald Trump's assertion that the test "won't happen."
When will North Korea test-launch an ICBM?
This question will resolve as positive when a guided missile with a range of more than 5,500 km, capable of hosting a nuclear warhead, is test-launched by the North Korean government. Resolution is by credible media report, with assessment provided by US or UK government or United Nations. (In case of major controversy in such assessments, resolves as ambiguous.) | true | 2018-03-01 | Will North Korea test-launch an ICBM by the end of 2018? | metaculus | 1 |
2018-01-04 | 2017-02-11 | [] | binary | [["2017-02-11", 0.36], ["2017-02-13", 0.266], ["2017-02-13", 0.178], ["2017-02-15", 0.19], ["2017-02-18", 0.18], ["2017-03-03", 0.209], ["2017-03-03", 0.226], ["2017-03-06", 0.228], ["2017-03-08", 0.22], ["2017-03-13", 0.212], ["2017-03-13", 0.215], ["2017-03-24", 0.214], ["2017-05-06", 0.243], ["2017-05-07", 0.225], ["2017-05-08", 0.217], ["2017-05-08", 0.217], ["2017-05-09", 0.212], ["2017-05-14", 0.215], ["2017-05-21", 0.215], ["2017-05-21", 0.216], ["2017-05-23", 0.217], ["2017-05-24", 0.214], ["2017-06-01", 0.215], ["2017-06-03", 0.21], ["2017-06-03", 0.21], ["2017-06-04", 0.205], ["2017-06-05", 0.199], ["2017-06-09", 0.199], ["2017-06-23", 0.208], ["2017-06-23", 0.21], ["2017-06-27", 0.21], ["2017-06-29", 0.212], ["2017-07-14", 0.207], ["2017-07-18", 0.207], ["2017-07-26", 0.21], ["2017-07-29", 0.211], ["2017-08-03", 0.211], ["2017-08-04", 0.201], ["2017-08-05", 0.182], ["2017-08-06", 0.172], ["2017-08-07", 0.17], ["2017-08-08", 0.168], ["2017-08-08", 0.166], ["2017-08-10", 0.172], ["2017-08-12", 0.172], ["2017-08-15", 0.17], ["2017-08-15", 0.169], ["2017-08-18", 0.167], ["2017-08-29", 0.166], ["2017-09-07", 0.164], ["2017-09-08", 0.163], ["2017-09-14", 0.161], ["2017-09-23", 0.161], ["2017-09-24", 0.161], ["2017-10-01", 0.159], ["2017-10-02", 0.157], ["2017-10-03", 0.157], ["2017-10-07", 0.159], ["2017-10-07", 0.154], ["2017-10-11", 0.154], ["2017-10-14", 0.154], ["2017-10-18", 0.152], ["2017-10-23", 0.153], ["2017-10-28", 0.153], ["2017-10-29", 0.152], ["2017-10-30", 0.151], ["2017-10-31", 0.149], ["2017-11-04", 0.149], ["2017-11-05", 0.148], ["2017-11-06", 0.148], ["2017-11-07", 0.147], ["2017-11-08", 0.145], ["2017-11-12", 0.145], ["2017-11-12", 0.143], ["2017-11-14", 0.143], ["2017-11-15", 0.143], ["2017-11-15", 0.14], ["2017-11-16", 0.14], ["2017-11-17", 0.129], ["2017-11-18", 0.13], ["2017-11-20", 0.129], ["2017-11-21", 0.128], ["2017-11-22", 0.128], ["2017-11-24", 0.128], ["2017-11-25", 0.125], ["2017-11-26", 0.125], ["2017-11-29", 0.125], ["2017-11-30", 0.128], ["2017-12-01", 0.128], ["2017-12-02", 0.127], ["2017-12-03", 0.125], ["2017-12-04", 0.124], ["2017-12-04", 0.121], ["2017-12-06", 0.119], ["2017-12-07", 0.119], ["2017-12-07", 0.122], ["2017-12-08", 0.122], ["2017-12-09", 0.12], ["2017-12-11", 0.121], ["2017-12-11", 0.119], ["2017-12-12", 0.119]] | https://www.metaculus.com/api2/questions/434/ | Not applicable/available for this question. | Sports | Set in 2014, the world record for a standard 26.2 marathon is 2:02:57. Looking to push the limits of human performance, Nike announced in December 2016 a concerted effort, called Breaking2, to complete a marathon in under two hours in 2017. The Oregon company enlisted the help of three of the world's best marathoners: Eritrean Zersenay Tadese, Ethiopian Lelisa Desisa, and Kenyan Eliud Kipchoge. As of this writing, the date of the attempt had not yet been announced.
The world-record marathon time is already a major human achievement, and pushing against the two-hour mark requires shaving off an additional 3% off the world-record time. Nike is engineering the perfect conditions for a marathon, including a cool track, aerodynamic clothing, and the perfect nutrition and training regimen.
Despite all Nike can do, however, they may be limited by the upper limits of what the body is capable of. A 1991 paper hypothesized that the fastest a human could possibly run a marathon was 1:57:58.
Will one of Nike's Breaking2 runners complete a marathon in under two hours in 2017?
This question will resolve as positive if Nike reports, and an independent body verifies, that a runner completed a 26.2 mile marathon course in less than two hours on or before Dec. 31, 2017. | true | 2017-12-13 | Will a 2-hour marathon be run in 2017? | metaculus | 0 |
2018-12-31 | 2017-02-11 | [] | binary | [["2017-02-14", 0.37], ["2017-02-15", 0.287], ["2017-02-16", 0.288], ["2017-02-17", 0.308], ["2017-02-18", 0.289], ["2017-02-18", 0.297], ["2017-02-23", 0.303], ["2017-02-24", 0.332], ["2017-03-04", 0.327], ["2017-03-09", 0.319], ["2017-03-10", 0.306], ["2017-03-10", 0.31], ["2017-03-13", 0.306], ["2017-03-13", 0.304], ["2017-03-14", 0.315], ["2017-05-06", 0.307], ["2017-05-08", 0.307], ["2017-05-12", 0.302], ["2017-05-14", 0.304], ["2017-05-20", 0.306], ["2017-05-20", 0.317], ["2017-05-21", 0.314], ["2017-05-25", 0.318], ["2017-05-25", 0.318], ["2017-06-04", 0.312], ["2017-06-09", 0.313], ["2017-06-20", 0.313], ["2017-06-23", 0.308], ["2017-06-28", 0.309], ["2017-07-01", 0.31], ["2017-07-02", 0.307], ["2017-07-03", 0.314], ["2017-07-17", 0.314], ["2017-07-18", 0.313], ["2017-07-23", 0.311], ["2017-07-29", 0.311], ["2017-08-04", 0.307], ["2017-08-04", 0.299], ["2017-08-06", 0.286], ["2017-08-06", 0.288], ["2017-08-07", 0.285], ["2017-08-09", 0.286], ["2017-08-10", 0.285], ["2017-08-10", 0.285], ["2017-08-12", 0.292], ["2017-08-29", 0.288], ["2017-09-01", 0.287], ["2017-09-03", 0.285], ["2017-09-16", 0.282], ["2017-09-16", 0.28], ["2017-09-21", 0.284], ["2017-09-21", 0.284], ["2017-09-24", 0.284], ["2017-10-01", 0.282], ["2017-10-07", 0.282], ["2017-10-18", 0.282], ["2017-10-31", 0.282], ["2017-11-04", 0.282], ["2017-11-07", 0.281], ["2017-11-15", 0.285], ["2017-11-17", 0.285], ["2017-11-17", 0.282], ["2017-11-24", 0.279], ["2017-11-25", 0.28], ["2017-11-26", 0.278], ["2017-11-27", 0.281], ["2017-11-28", 0.278], ["2017-11-29", 0.278], ["2017-12-02", 0.273], ["2017-12-05", 0.272], ["2018-01-02", 0.272], ["2018-01-03", 0.27], ["2018-01-04", 0.269], ["2018-01-05", 0.27], ["2018-01-09", 0.271], ["2018-01-09", 0.271], ["2018-01-11", 0.271], ["2018-01-12", 0.269], ["2018-01-14", 0.269], ["2018-01-16", 0.267], ["2018-01-24", 0.267], ["2018-01-24", 0.264], ["2018-01-25", 0.264], ["2018-01-26", 0.263], ["2018-01-26", 0.263], ["2018-02-05", 0.263], ["2018-02-11", 0.263], ["2018-02-13", 0.264], ["2018-02-18", 0.262], ["2018-02-22", 0.262], ["2018-02-23", 0.263], ["2018-03-01", 0.264], ["2018-03-02", 0.264], ["2018-03-03", 0.264], ["2018-03-04", 0.26], ["2018-03-05", 0.258], ["2018-03-05", 0.258], ["2018-03-07", 0.258], ["2018-03-07", 0.257], ["2018-03-13", 0.256], ["2018-03-14", 0.257]] | https://www.metaculus.com/api2/questions/435/ | Not applicable/available for this question. | Security & Defense | In February 2017, U.S. Secretary of Defense James Mattis reiterated a commitment to diplomacy in the South China Sea - a region recognized as one of the world’s most volatile international hotspots - while asserting that China has overstepped its bounds in the region.
The sea is known by different names in the countries surrounding it, primarily China, Vietnam, Malaysia, and the Philippines. Each of the nations has asserted territorial claims over portions of the sea and its islands, claims which overlap. At stake is control of the busy fishing and shipping region, as well as the vast estimated oil and gas reserves in the South China Sea floor.
The Spratly Islands compose some of the most hotly contested territory. The 14 islands and around 100 reefs and atolls are occupied by military personnel from China, Taiwan, Malaysia, the Philippines, and Vietnam.
Disputes over the South China Sea date back to the 1940s, and continue today. China has emerged as the most aggressive claimant, and has built military fortifications, airstrips, and artificial islands in the sea. In 2011 an Indian military vessel in the sea was warned via radio that it was entering Chinese waters.
In July 2016, the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea ruled in favor of the Philippines that China had no historical right to its claimed territory, typically known as the "nine-dash-line" map. Neither China nor Taiwan has accepted the ruling.
Comments from world leaders suggest that the territorial disputes in the sea could erupt into armed conflict. Secretary of State Rex Tillerson said in his confirmation hearings: “We’re going to have to send China a clear signal that, first, the island-building stops and, second, your access to those islands also is not going to be allowed.”
In response, from China's Global Times newspaper: "If Trump's diplomatic team shapes future Sino-US ties as it is doing now, the two sides had better prepare for a military clash."
TIllerson's remarks have been walked back, particularly by Mattis' statements on his Asian tour, yet tensions in the region remain high.
Will armed conflict begin in the South China Sea before 2019?
This question will resolve as positive if a credible, verified news outlet reports that an exchange of weapon fire occurred in the South China Sea, between any state actors, to enforce territorial claims, on or before December 31, 2018. | true | 2018-03-15 | Armed conflict in the South China Sea by 2019? | metaculus | 0 |
2019-03-21 | 2017-02-11 | [] | binary | [["2017-02-13", 0.81], ["2017-02-18", 0.695], ["2017-02-23", 0.72], ["2017-02-28", 0.714], ["2017-03-09", 0.701], ["2017-03-20", 0.705], ["2017-03-22", 0.706], ["2017-03-28", 0.684], ["2017-04-18", 0.676], ["2017-04-25", 0.639], ["2017-05-08", 0.617], ["2017-05-14", 0.635], ["2017-05-21", 0.629], ["2017-06-09", 0.634], ["2017-06-14", 0.628], ["2017-06-17", 0.601], ["2017-06-26", 0.598], ["2017-06-29", 0.598], ["2017-07-22", 0.571], ["2017-07-28", 0.57], ["2017-08-04", 0.57], ["2017-08-10", 0.398], ["2017-08-15", 0.392], ["2017-08-19", 0.387], ["2017-08-27", 0.387], ["2017-09-03", 0.383], ["2017-09-24", 0.379], ["2017-10-01", 0.378], ["2017-10-07", 0.376], ["2017-11-15", 0.375], ["2017-11-15", 0.375], ["2017-12-08", 0.371], ["2018-01-04", 0.375], ["2018-01-05", 0.37], ["2018-01-18", 0.37], ["2018-01-18", 0.368], ["2018-01-26", 0.368], ["2018-03-16", 0.367], ["2018-03-21", 0.363], ["2018-03-27", 0.359], ["2018-03-31", 0.352], ["2018-04-05", 0.349], ["2018-04-09", 0.354], ["2018-04-12", 0.351], ["2018-04-18", 0.356], ["2018-04-23", 0.352], ["2018-04-29", 0.355], ["2018-05-03", 0.341], ["2018-05-10", 0.337], ["2018-05-15", 0.34], ["2018-05-18", 0.34], ["2018-05-23", 0.338], ["2018-05-27", 0.338], ["2018-06-02", 0.338], ["2018-06-06", 0.338], ["2018-06-14", 0.338], ["2018-06-18", 0.338], ["2018-06-22", 0.337], ["2018-06-29", 0.333], ["2018-07-04", 0.337], ["2018-07-07", 0.337], ["2018-07-12", 0.334], ["2018-07-19", 0.333], ["2018-07-23", 0.33], ["2018-07-28", 0.332], ["2018-08-01", 0.33], ["2018-08-04", 0.327], ["2018-08-10", 0.319], ["2018-08-15", 0.326], ["2018-08-20", 0.323], ["2018-08-24", 0.323], ["2018-08-29", 0.323], ["2018-09-03", 0.321], ["2018-09-08", 0.32], ["2018-09-14", 0.321], ["2018-09-21", 0.322], ["2018-09-27", 0.322], ["2018-10-06", 0.322], ["2018-10-08", 0.318], ["2018-10-14", 0.318], ["2018-10-19", 0.323], ["2018-10-24", 0.323], ["2018-10-30", 0.323], ["2018-11-04", 0.321], ["2018-11-09", 0.319], ["2018-11-14", 0.322], ["2018-11-18", 0.323], ["2018-11-23", 0.316], ["2018-11-27", 0.316], ["2018-12-02", 0.313], ["2018-12-06", 0.318], ["2018-12-11", 0.316], ["2018-12-15", 0.314], ["2018-12-20", 0.314], ["2018-12-26", 0.317], ["2019-01-01", 0.314], ["2019-01-09", 0.314], ["2019-01-16", 0.301], ["2019-01-21", 0.288], ["2019-01-29", 0.282], ["2019-01-31", 0.269]] | https://www.metaculus.com/api2/questions/436/ | Not applicable/available for this question. | Politics & Governance | The terms of Great Britain's exit ("Brexit") from the European Union state that once the nation delivers notice of intent to leave the union, a two-year negotiation period commences for the nation to redefine its relationship with the remaining member states. Article 50 of the Treaty on European Union sets forth the exit terms.
Britain's prime minister, Theresa May, has signaled intent to trigger Article 50 by March 2017. Although some British officials have called for a transitional period of exit lasting longer than two years, the nation's chief negotiator has set his own negotiation completion target of October 2018 to allow time for the deal to be ratified by the targeted exit date, March 2019.
Will Brexit negotiations be completed and ratified before the end of March 2019?
This question will resolve as positive if a credible news outlet reports that the terms of Britain's exit from the European Union have been ratified on or before March 31, 2019, and that the exit will occur on or before that date, with no transitional periods or extensions of negotiations requested. | true | 2019-02-01 | Brexit negotiations completed by March 2019? | metaculus | 0 |
2017-05-08 | 2017-03-09 | [] | binary | [["2017-03-18", 0.45], ["2017-03-18", 0.325], ["2017-03-18", 0.325], ["2017-03-19", 0.432], ["2017-03-19", 0.438], ["2017-03-19", 0.438], ["2017-03-20", 0.368], ["2017-03-20", 0.368], ["2017-03-20", 0.317], ["2017-03-20", 0.362], ["2017-03-20", 0.348], ["2017-03-20", 0.332], ["2017-03-20", 0.343], ["2017-03-20", 0.33], ["2017-03-20", 0.319], ["2017-03-20", 0.322], ["2017-03-20", 0.314], ["2017-03-21", 0.314], ["2017-03-21", 0.307], ["2017-03-21", 0.305], ["2017-03-22", 0.282], ["2017-03-22", 0.282], ["2017-03-22", 0.283], ["2017-03-22", 0.268], ["2017-03-23", 0.268], ["2017-03-23", 0.271], ["2017-03-24", 0.265], ["2017-03-24", 0.268], ["2017-03-25", 0.264], ["2017-03-25", 0.264], ["2017-03-28", 0.261], ["2017-03-31", 0.261], ["2017-03-31", 0.257], ["2017-04-01", 0.262], ["2017-04-01", 0.262], ["2017-04-02", 0.272], ["2017-04-02", 0.28], ["2017-04-03", 0.278], ["2017-04-04", 0.275], ["2017-04-04", 0.274], ["2017-04-05", 0.274], ["2017-04-08", 0.266], ["2017-04-10", 0.258], ["2017-04-12", 0.258], ["2017-04-12", 0.263], ["2017-04-14", 0.286], ["2017-04-14", 0.283], ["2017-04-15", 0.282], ["2017-04-15", 0.282], ["2017-04-15", 0.293], ["2017-04-16", 0.293], ["2017-04-16", 0.294], ["2017-04-16", 0.294], ["2017-04-17", 0.315], ["2017-04-17", 0.315], ["2017-04-18", 0.315], ["2017-04-18", 0.311], ["2017-04-19", 0.311], ["2017-04-19", 0.308], ["2017-04-19", 0.306], ["2017-04-19", 0.306], ["2017-04-19", 0.317], ["2017-04-20", 0.317], ["2017-04-20", 0.317], ["2017-04-21", 0.319], ["2017-04-21", 0.315], ["2017-04-21", 0.319], ["2017-04-21", 0.319]] | https://www.metaculus.com/api2/questions/448/ | Not applicable/available for this question. | Politics & Governance | The French presidential election will be held on 23rd April (first round) and 7th May (second round). Marine le Pen is a candidate for the "Front National" party.
More information, including recent polls, is available on on Wikipedia.
Resolution is positive if Marine le Pen wins the second round of the French presidential election and is therefore elected president. | true | 2017-04-22 | Will Marine le Pen win the French presidential Election ? | metaculus | 0 |
2019-12-30 | 2017-03-10 | [] | binary | [["2017-03-13", 0.25], ["2017-03-13", 0.233], ["2017-03-13", 0.313], ["2017-03-14", 0.3], ["2017-03-14", 0.289], ["2017-03-14", 0.297], ["2017-03-15", 0.319], ["2017-03-16", 0.313], ["2017-03-20", 0.32], ["2017-03-21", 0.32], ["2017-03-28", 0.345], ["2017-03-29", 0.376], ["2017-03-30", 0.376], ["2017-03-30", 0.387], ["2017-04-01", 0.387], ["2017-04-13", 0.412], ["2017-04-16", 0.402], ["2017-04-30", 0.402], ["2017-05-01", 0.419], ["2017-05-02", 0.44], ["2017-05-03", 0.455], ["2017-05-08", 0.455], ["2017-05-12", 0.483], ["2017-05-14", 0.481], ["2017-05-14", 0.481], ["2017-05-18", 0.483], ["2017-05-20", 0.484], ["2017-05-21", 0.477], ["2017-05-22", 0.477], ["2017-05-23", 0.483], ["2017-05-23", 0.483], ["2017-05-24", 0.478], ["2017-05-25", 0.48], ["2017-05-26", 0.482], ["2017-05-27", 0.48], ["2017-05-27", 0.483], ["2017-05-27", 0.486], ["2017-05-31", 0.487], ["2017-06-01", 0.499], ["2017-06-02", 0.502], ["2017-06-03", 0.5], ["2017-06-04", 0.492], ["2017-06-04", 0.492], ["2017-06-09", 0.493], ["2017-06-13", 0.495], ["2017-06-14", 0.495], ["2017-06-15", 0.493], ["2017-06-23", 0.494], ["2017-06-23", 0.494], ["2017-06-27", 0.494], ["2017-07-18", 0.492], ["2017-07-18", 0.495], ["2017-07-21", 0.493], ["2017-07-22", 0.498], ["2017-07-22", 0.501], ["2017-07-24", 0.5], ["2017-07-25", 0.499], ["2017-07-28", 0.499], ["2017-07-29", 0.497], ["2017-08-02", 0.499], ["2017-08-04", 0.496], ["2017-08-04", 0.494], ["2017-08-04", 0.49], ["2017-08-05", 0.493], ["2017-08-07", 0.493], ["2017-08-08", 0.488], ["2017-08-10", 0.486], ["2017-08-10", 0.493], ["2017-08-11", 0.493], ["2017-08-11", 0.485], ["2017-08-14", 0.485], ["2017-08-14", 0.489], ["2017-08-15", 0.486], ["2017-08-18", 0.491], ["2017-08-18", 0.491], ["2017-08-20", 0.49], ["2017-08-23", 0.49], ["2017-08-24", 0.487], ["2017-08-24", 0.484], ["2017-08-24", 0.484], ["2017-08-26", 0.484], ["2017-08-27", 0.484], ["2017-08-27", 0.483], ["2017-08-28", 0.483], ["2017-08-28", 0.482], ["2017-08-29", 0.482], ["2017-08-31", 0.482], ["2017-08-31", 0.483], ["2017-09-01", 0.483], ["2017-09-01", 0.483], ["2017-09-03", 0.483], ["2017-09-04", 0.483], ["2017-09-06", 0.487], ["2017-09-07", 0.488], ["2017-09-07", 0.485], ["2017-09-10", 0.487], ["2017-09-10", 0.483], ["2017-09-13", 0.483], ["2017-09-14", 0.477], ["2017-09-14", 0.477], ["2017-09-14", 0.475]] | https://www.metaculus.com/api2/questions/449/ | Not applicable/available for this question. | Security & Defense | Until 1991, the Soviet Union encompassed 22.4 million square kilometers, clearly claiming the title of the largest nation on Earth. That title is retained today by the Russian Federation, although diminished by the independence of the 14 nations that broke away from the Soviet Union in the 1990s.
A degree of nostalgia for the days of the Soviet Union still lingers among the former Soviet republics. Russia's current president, Vladimir Putin, holds that the dissolution of the Soviet Union was a political disaster.
In 2014, Russian military invaded and annexed the Crimean peninsula, a move condemned internationally and still unrecognized by all but a handful of nations. The aftermath of the annexation has seen armed conflict in Ukraine's eastern regions, in which Russian-speaking separatists (allegedly supported by an unknown number of Russian military) fought with government forces in 2014 and 2015.
More recently, Russian military activities in Kaliningrad, a non-contiguous Russian exclave between Poland and Lithuania, has neighboring countries on edge. The Baltic nations of Lithuania, Estonia and Latvia are members of NATO, but are also former Soviet republics, and the military buildup in Kaliningrad has raised concerns that an invasion of the Baltics, as an effort to reclaim Soviet territory, may be upcoming. In response to the threat, nearby Sweden reinstated mandatory military service.
In June 2016, the Secretary General of NATO warned of Russian military buildups "in Arctic, the Baltic, from the Black Sea to the Mediterranean," adding "We must respond to that."
Will Russia pursue expansion by military means by 2020?
This question will resolve as positive if Russia claims that territory of a sovereign nation is now under its authority following military activity in the area conclusively tied to Russian forces, as reported by multiple credible, verified independent sources, on or before January 1, 2020. | true | 2017-09-15 | Will Russia expand by means of armed conflict before 2020? | metaculus | 0 |
2017-08-27 | 2017-03-12 | [] | binary | [["2017-03-13", 0.6], ["2017-03-13", 0.62], ["2017-03-13", 0.62], ["2017-03-13", 0.49], ["2017-03-13", 0.458], ["2017-03-14", 0.458], ["2017-03-14", 0.41], ["2017-03-14", 0.42], ["2017-03-15", 0.431], ["2017-03-16", 0.432], ["2017-03-16", 0.432], ["2017-03-17", 0.421], ["2017-03-18", 0.471], ["2017-03-19", 0.471], ["2017-03-20", 0.495], ["2017-03-20", 0.495], ["2017-03-21", 0.511], ["2017-03-23", 0.511], ["2017-03-23", 0.492], ["2017-03-24", 0.511], ["2017-03-28", 0.511], ["2017-03-28", 0.507], ["2017-03-31", 0.521], ["2017-04-01", 0.525], ["2017-04-06", 0.515], ["2017-04-10", 0.514], ["2017-04-10", 0.501], ["2017-04-11", 0.501], ["2017-04-11", 0.503], ["2017-04-12", 0.491], ["2017-04-13", 0.49], ["2017-04-14", 0.491], ["2017-04-14", 0.489], ["2017-04-14", 0.5], ["2017-04-15", 0.5], ["2017-04-15", 0.501]] | https://www.metaculus.com/api2/questions/451/ | Not applicable/available for this question. | Arts & Recreation | Season 6 of HBO's hit drama Game of Thrones ended with Daenerys Targaryen leading an invading fleet (and three rather large dragons) toward Westeros. Meanwhile Jon Snow has declared himself "King in the North."
There is arguably some momentum toward Snow and Targaryan emerging as the two strong and sympathetic characters that could lead to a very satisfying series ending. On the other hand, this is not a series known for its predictability nor unwillingness to kill off major and even sympathetic characters. Let's ask:
Will Jon Snow bend the knee to Daenerys Targaryen?
We'll take this question to have a double meaning. It resolves positively if Jon personally surrenders, or proposes marriage, to Daenerys in an episode airing in 2017. An alliance does not count. In the unlikely event that Daenarys proposes marriage to Jon, that will also resolve positive. | true | 2017-04-15 | Will there be a Game of Thrones episode airing in 2017, in which Jon Snow bends the knee to Daenerys Targaryen? | metaculus | 1 |
2017-10-30 | 2017-03-22 | [] | binary | [["2017-03-22", 0.15], ["2017-03-22", 0.153], ["2017-03-23", 0.269], ["2017-03-23", 0.3], ["2017-03-24", 0.292], ["2017-03-26", 0.292], ["2017-03-26", 0.315], ["2017-03-27", 0.31], ["2017-03-28", 0.31], ["2017-03-29", 0.318], ["2017-03-30", 0.3], ["2017-03-31", 0.311], ["2017-03-31", 0.307], ["2017-04-01", 0.288], ["2017-04-02", 0.288], ["2017-04-02", 0.286], ["2017-04-04", 0.286], ["2017-04-05", 0.295], ["2017-04-06", 0.294], ["2017-04-10", 0.292], ["2017-04-13", 0.292], ["2017-04-14", 0.292], ["2017-04-14", 0.292], ["2017-04-15", 0.287], ["2017-04-15", 0.288], ["2017-04-16", 0.287], ["2017-04-20", 0.288], ["2017-04-23", 0.284], ["2017-04-23", 0.287], ["2017-04-25", 0.287], ["2017-04-26", 0.286], ["2017-04-26", 0.286], ["2017-04-29", 0.301], ["2017-05-01", 0.304], ["2017-05-02", 0.304], ["2017-05-08", 0.296], ["2017-05-08", 0.302], ["2017-05-09", 0.302], ["2017-05-10", 0.304], ["2017-05-14", 0.305], ["2017-05-14", 0.308], ["2017-05-17", 0.308], ["2017-05-18", 0.327], ["2017-05-18", 0.338], ["2017-05-20", 0.342], ["2017-05-20", 0.368], ["2017-05-21", 0.389], ["2017-05-21", 0.405], ["2017-05-22", 0.41], ["2017-05-23", 0.414], ["2017-05-24", 0.418], ["2017-05-24", 0.429], ["2017-05-25", 0.432], ["2017-05-25", 0.433], ["2017-05-27", 0.432], ["2017-05-31", 0.426], ["2017-05-31", 0.431], ["2017-06-03", 0.429], ["2017-06-09", 0.429], ["2017-06-12", 0.428], ["2017-06-15", 0.428], ["2017-06-15", 0.433], ["2017-06-16", 0.434], ["2017-06-16", 0.434], ["2017-06-17", 0.436], ["2017-06-18", 0.437], ["2017-06-18", 0.444], ["2017-06-19", 0.439], ["2017-06-19", 0.44], ["2017-06-20", 0.445], ["2017-06-21", 0.445], ["2017-06-21", 0.447], ["2017-06-23", 0.448], ["2017-06-26", 0.45], ["2017-06-28", 0.45], ["2017-06-29", 0.447], ["2017-06-30", 0.449], ["2017-06-30", 0.458], ["2017-07-01", 0.458], ["2017-07-05", 0.458], ["2017-07-06", 0.459], ["2017-07-06", 0.459], ["2017-07-07", 0.458], ["2017-07-09", 0.458], ["2017-07-10", 0.459], ["2017-07-11", 0.465], ["2017-07-11", 0.463], ["2017-07-12", 0.464], ["2017-07-12", 0.464], ["2017-07-13", 0.463], ["2017-07-14", 0.464], ["2017-07-14", 0.464], ["2017-07-17", 0.464], ["2017-07-17", 0.465], ["2017-07-18", 0.465], ["2017-07-18", 0.459], ["2017-07-19", 0.46], ["2017-07-20", 0.456], ["2017-07-21", 0.459], ["2017-07-22", 0.46], ["2017-07-22", 0.458]] | https://www.metaculus.com/api2/questions/453/ | Not applicable/available for this question. | Politics & Governance | The ongoing reports that Russia acted to influence the 2016 US Presidential Election in Trump's favor reached a dramatic new point in mid-March 2017, with FBI director announcing during a senate hearing that the FBI is continuing investigation into Russia's election interference and that
That includes investigating the nature of any links between individuals associated with the Trump campaign and the Russian government and whether there was any coordination between the campaign and Russia's efforts," Comey said in his opening statement to the committee.
Comey did not disclose any particular individual(s) under investigation, though there are several possibilities, including those discussed by Adam Schiff in his testimony during the hearing.
Will any US citizen be charged in connection with the FBI's investigation of potential coordination between the Trump campaign and Russia?
Resolution is positive if formal charges are brought by the FBI or justice department in connection with the case. Charges brought in connection with Russian influence but unrelated to anyone in Trump's campaign will not count toward resolution. The party need not be successfully indicted. | true | 2017-07-23 | Any charges by end of 2017 by FBI's investigation of Russia-Trump campaign ties? | metaculus | 1 |
2017-06-21 | 2017-04-19 | [] | binary | [["2017-04-19", 0.9], ["2017-04-19", 0.775], ["2017-04-20", 0.775], ["2017-04-21", 0.738], ["2017-04-21", 0.738], ["2017-04-22", 0.718], ["2017-04-23", 0.719], ["2017-04-23", 0.713], ["2017-04-23", 0.713], ["2017-04-23", 0.654], ["2017-04-25", 0.681], ["2017-04-25", 0.681], ["2017-04-25", 0.67], ["2017-04-28", 0.668], ["2017-05-01", 0.673], ["2017-05-01", 0.677], ["2017-05-01", 0.677], ["2017-05-01", 0.668], ["2017-05-01", 0.668], ["2017-05-01", 0.668], ["2017-05-01", 0.668], ["2017-05-01", 0.668], ["2017-05-01", 0.668], ["2017-05-01", 0.668], ["2017-05-01", 0.668], ["2017-05-01", 0.679], ["2017-05-02", 0.679], ["2017-05-02", 0.673], ["2017-05-08", 0.69], ["2017-05-09", 0.692], ["2017-05-09", 0.694], ["2017-05-09", 0.694], ["2017-05-10", 0.699], ["2017-05-10", 0.7], ["2017-05-11", 0.708], ["2017-05-12", 0.704], ["2017-05-14", 0.709], ["2017-05-14", 0.712], ["2017-05-14", 0.708], ["2017-05-14", 0.705]] | https://www.metaculus.com/api2/questions/460/ | Not applicable/available for this question. | Science & Tech | The February 2016 detection of gravitational waves by the earth-bound LIGO observatory heralded the beginning of gravitational-wave astronomy. Much as other forms of astronomy collect information by observing visible light, infrared, or x-rays, gravitational-wave astronomy observes the universe via the ripples in space-time that emanate from cosmic events, such as the collision of black holes.
In response to the newfound interest in gravitational waves, the European Space Agency chose "The Gravitational Universe" as the theme for its L3 mission, slated for a 2034 launch. ESA's call for mission proposals closed in January 2017.
One of the proposals submitted is for the Laser Interferometer Space Antenna (LISA), a mission that would comprise three spacecraft, arranged in a triangle. As gravitational waves pass by the antenna, the ripples in gravity will change the distance between the points in a manner detectable by the primary spacecraft. The distance between the spacecraft is large – ten times larger than the orbit of the moon.
Technology for this proposed mission was proven on a test mission, LISA Pathfinder, which launched in 2015. The smaller craft showed that two test masses could be isolated from all forces but gravity, and that the detector could pick up discrepancies in the laser signal on the minuscule picometer scale. LISA Pathfinder's mission was recently extended to June 2017.
The LISA mission has had a turbulent funding history. The mission was first proposed to the ESA in the 1990s and gained additional traction with the participation of NASA, promised in 1997. NASA withdrew in 2011, however, citing budget cuts. ESA then asked the proposed L1 missions, including LISA, to reformulate lower-cost versions. The revamped New Gravitational wave Observatory was passed over for funding in 2012.
But the mission's luck changed with the L3 mission proposals. LIGO's discovery prompted a resurgent interest in gravitational wave astronomy and led to the ESA's mission theme. At the same time, LISA Pathfinder had returned successful results, proving out the mission's technology. Finally, NASA rejoined the project, although as a junior partner. (Whether the US contribution will rise to the level of 20% is subject of another question).
Will ESA select the LISA mission as its L3 mission, to launch in 2034?
This question will resolve as positive if LISA is chosen as ESA's mission for study by May 31, 2017. | true | 2017-05-15 | LISA chosen by ESA to move forward? | metaculus | 0 |
2018-02-03 | 2017-04-19 | [] | binary | [["2017-04-19", 0.72], ["2017-04-19", 0.72], ["2017-04-20", 0.505], ["2017-04-21", 0.495], ["2017-04-21", 0.495], ["2017-04-22", 0.444], ["2017-04-23", 0.42], ["2017-04-25", 0.429], ["2017-04-26", 0.438], ["2017-05-01", 0.438], ["2017-05-01", 0.45], ["2017-05-02", 0.475], ["2017-05-02", 0.488], ["2017-05-08", 0.488], ["2017-05-10", 0.465], ["2017-05-14", 0.465], ["2017-05-16", 0.466], ["2017-05-17", 0.477], ["2017-05-18", 0.477], ["2017-05-18", 0.478], ["2017-05-19", 0.47], ["2017-05-22", 0.474], ["2017-05-25", 0.474], ["2017-06-04", 0.492], ["2017-06-05", 0.492], ["2017-06-09", 0.486], ["2017-07-18", 0.491], ["2017-07-20", 0.497], ["2017-08-12", 0.497], ["2017-08-14", 0.513], ["2017-09-02", 0.513], ["2017-09-24", 0.513], ["2017-10-08", 0.515], ["2017-10-25", 0.515], ["2017-11-03", 0.516], ["2017-11-07", 0.516], ["2017-11-09", 0.509], ["2018-01-02", 0.506], ["2018-01-03", 0.507], ["2018-01-05", 0.507], ["2018-01-07", 0.507], ["2018-01-08", 0.51], ["2018-01-09", 0.51], ["2018-01-09", 0.51], ["2018-01-10", 0.51], ["2018-01-14", 0.51], ["2018-01-15", 0.506], ["2018-01-18", 0.501], ["2018-01-19", 0.5], ["2018-01-25", 0.495], ["2018-01-26", 0.495], ["2018-01-30", 0.496]] | https://www.metaculus.com/api2/questions/461/ | Not applicable/available for this question. | Healthcare & Biology | Sepsis, also known as blood poisoning, is an infection that spans multiple systems of the body, often leading to loss of blood pressure, organ failure, and death. Sepsis is the leading cause of death in hospitals, claiming around 300,000 people per year in the United States. Paul Marik, a doctor in Norfolk, VA developing a new sepsis treatment, says the death rate from the infection is akin to "three jumbo jets crashing every day."
Currently, hospitals treat sepsis by administering fluids and antibiotics. Marik's treatment involves a mix of corticosteroids and two vitamins - Vitamin B and Vitamin C. The combination, Marik says, boosts the body's reception of the steroids,which relieve the inflammation associated with sepsis. Marik says he's treated 150 patients with his custom combo now, and only one has died of sepsis.
Marik's treatment seems miraculous and potentially transformative in the way sepsis is treated - so naturally and rightfully, physicians are wary. A chief concern is that the treatment hasn't been through a randomized double-blind controlled trial, the gold standard of evaluating medical treatments. In such a trial, patients are randomly assigned to receive either the treatment or a placebo, with neither the patient or the doctor aware of who receives what. One physician stated that with the claims Marik has made, even a small study could corroborate them. Ideally, such a study would be carried out at multiple hospitals to ensure the effect could be replicated.
Part of doctors' skepticism comes from the history of sepsis treatments. In 2011, two potential treatments failed due to a lack of clear evidence that they were effective. Both were pharmaceuticals, which proceed through a different approval pathway than Marik's treatment, which does not involve any new drugs, but rather a combination of existing compounds. Marik will have to submit a research proposal for funding, with a review process that could take nine months. Results wouldn't be available for probably two years.
But if the treatment is proven effective, it could save millions of lives and reshape medicine's understanding of how the body responds to inflammation.
Will a randomized, controlled, double-blind trial of Marik's treatment begin before 2019?
This question will resolve as positive if a clinical trial registry such as clinicaltrials.gov or a credible news outlet reports that a trial treatment for sepsis involving corticosteroids and vitamins C and D is underway on or before December 31, 2018. | true | 2018-02-19 | Clinical trial of new treatment for sepsis? | metaculus | 1 |
2020-05-16 | 2017-04-27 | [] | binary | [["2017-04-27", 0.125], ["2017-04-27", 0.125], ["2017-04-27", 0.133], ["2017-04-27", 0.148], ["2017-04-27", 0.178], ["2017-04-27", 0.189], ["2017-04-28", 0.186], ["2017-04-28", 0.187], ["2017-04-28", 0.206], ["2017-04-29", 0.206], ["2017-04-30", 0.208], ["2017-04-30", 0.208], ["2017-05-01", 0.185], ["2017-05-01", 0.185], ["2017-05-01", 0.202], ["2017-05-01", 0.253], ["2017-05-01", 0.26], ["2017-05-01", 0.26], ["2017-05-01", 0.256], ["2017-05-01", 0.264], ["2017-05-01", 0.253], ["2017-05-01", 0.262], ["2017-05-01", 0.298], ["2017-05-02", 0.298], ["2017-05-02", 0.313], ["2017-05-02", 0.326], ["2017-05-02", 0.323], ["2017-05-03", 0.349], ["2017-05-03", 0.344], ["2017-05-03", 0.344], ["2017-05-08", 0.331], ["2017-05-08", 0.327], ["2017-05-09", 0.327], ["2017-05-09", 0.327], ["2017-05-10", 0.329], ["2017-05-14", 0.329], ["2017-05-14", 0.326], ["2017-05-14", 0.328], ["2017-05-18", 0.33], ["2017-05-18", 0.325], ["2017-05-21", 0.322], ["2017-05-23", 0.328], ["2017-05-23", 0.328], ["2017-05-25", 0.328], ["2017-06-02", 0.329], ["2017-06-07", 0.329], ["2017-06-09", 0.331], ["2017-06-20", 0.331], ["2017-06-23", 0.326], ["2017-06-26", 0.334], ["2017-06-28", 0.328], ["2017-07-18", 0.323], ["2017-07-29", 0.326], ["2017-08-04", 0.323], ["2017-08-04", 0.32], ["2017-08-05", 0.32], ["2017-08-06", 0.309], ["2017-08-06", 0.309], ["2017-08-06", 0.299], ["2017-08-06", 0.299], ["2017-08-07", 0.299], ["2017-08-12", 0.298], ["2017-08-13", 0.298], ["2017-08-17", 0.289], ["2017-08-17", 0.289], ["2017-08-18", 0.293], ["2017-08-18", 0.306], ["2017-08-18", 0.306], ["2017-08-20", 0.304], ["2017-08-20", 0.304], ["2017-08-23", 0.305], ["2017-08-27", 0.304], ["2017-09-13", 0.302], ["2017-09-13", 0.302], ["2017-09-24", 0.304], ["2017-09-25", 0.299], ["2017-09-26", 0.293], ["2017-10-01", 0.293], ["2017-10-02", 0.291], ["2017-10-03", 0.291], ["2017-10-07", 0.292], ["2017-10-14", 0.292], ["2017-10-23", 0.294], ["2017-10-30", 0.3], ["2017-11-02", 0.301], ["2017-11-05", 0.301], ["2017-11-07", 0.301], ["2017-11-07", 0.299], ["2017-11-08", 0.297], ["2017-11-09", 0.297], ["2017-11-12", 0.297], ["2017-11-12", 0.297], ["2017-11-13", 0.297], ["2017-11-13", 0.3], ["2017-11-13", 0.3], ["2017-11-13", 0.3], ["2017-11-13", 0.302], ["2017-11-14", 0.302], ["2017-11-14", 0.302], ["2017-11-14", 0.302]] | https://www.metaculus.com/api2/questions/463/ | Not applicable/available for this question. | Science & Tech | A recent stunning and controversial claim by a group led by Tom Deméré, has emerged that a site in California contains fossil mammoth bones dating to ~130,000 BC that appear to have been broken and manipulated by human (or possibly other hominid) tools. This would predate by more than 1000 centuries the current general consensus that humans reached North America only around 25,000 years ago at earliest.
As nicely detailed in this National Geographic piece, other researchers are skeptical of the study, citing the absence of the tools themselves or other corroborating evidence.
So will this evidence for a (much) earlier hominid species in North America turn out to be true? To get at this we'll ask the following:
By start of 2020, will an additional site be discovered in California, dated to prior to 50,000 years ago and indicating Hominid presence, with an analysis published in a peer-reviewed journal that cites this discovery as evidence for the Deméré paper
OR
By start of 2019, will more than two additional and independent (no shared authorship) analyses of the Deméré et al. site's findings, published in peer reviewed journals, argue on the balance in favor of hominid presence prior to 100,000 BC in California. | true | 2017-11-15 | Confirmation that hominids existed in North America prior to 100,000 BC? | metaculus | 0 |
2017-05-16 | 2017-05-13 | [] | binary | [["2017-05-13", 0.93], ["2017-05-13", 0.915], ["2017-05-13", 0.917], ["2017-05-13", 0.92], ["2017-05-13", 0.92], ["2017-05-14", 0.938], ["2017-05-14", 0.927], ["2017-05-14", 0.927], ["2017-05-14", 0.893], ["2017-05-14", 0.888], ["2017-05-14", 0.888], ["2017-05-14", 0.894], ["2017-05-14", 0.844], ["2017-05-15", 0.833], ["2017-05-15", 0.839]] | https://www.metaculus.com/api2/questions/465/ | Not applicable/available for this question. | Environment & Energy | There are numerous stories in the news about a giant slimy unidentified sea creature that has washed up on shore in Indonesia.
There is speculation as to whether the creature is (a) a giant squid or octopus, (b) a whale, (c) Cthulu's tiny spawn, or (d) some other unknown creature.
Will the unidentified carcass turn out to be just a whale?
Resolution is positive if a credible media account reports that analysis by credible researchers has reliably identified the carcass as a whale. | true | 2017-05-15 | Is the giant rotting sea thing just a whale? | metaculus | 1 |
2019-02-01 | 2017-05-17 | [] | binary | [["2017-05-17", 0.6], ["2017-05-20", 0.552], ["2017-05-21", 0.467], ["2017-05-22", 0.464], ["2017-05-24", 0.471], ["2017-05-26", 0.48], ["2017-05-27", 0.475], ["2017-05-29", 0.477], ["2017-05-30", 0.476], ["2017-06-01", 0.473], ["2017-06-03", 0.468], ["2017-06-04", 0.462], ["2017-06-11", 0.462], ["2017-06-12", 0.458], ["2017-06-14", 0.462], ["2017-06-15", 0.47], ["2017-06-16", 0.47], ["2017-06-19", 0.471], ["2017-06-20", 0.467], ["2017-06-22", 0.467], ["2017-06-23", 0.465], ["2017-06-24", 0.469], ["2017-06-26", 0.471], ["2017-06-28", 0.473], ["2017-06-29", 0.473], ["2017-07-01", 0.47], ["2017-07-02", 0.476], ["2017-07-06", 0.474], ["2017-07-07", 0.472], ["2017-07-11", 0.476], ["2017-07-12", 0.477], ["2017-07-14", 0.48], ["2017-07-18", 0.483], ["2017-07-20", 0.483], ["2017-07-21", 0.486], ["2017-07-26", 0.486], ["2017-07-29", 0.487], ["2017-07-29", 0.486], ["2017-08-01", 0.485], ["2017-08-01", 0.485], ["2017-08-03", 0.487], ["2017-08-04", 0.545], ["2017-08-06", 0.572], ["2017-08-08", 0.587], ["2017-08-10", 0.589], ["2017-08-12", 0.589], ["2017-08-14", 0.591], ["2017-08-15", 0.592], ["2017-08-16", 0.592], ["2017-08-18", 0.592], ["2017-08-19", 0.59], ["2017-08-20", 0.592], ["2017-08-22", 0.593], ["2017-08-24", 0.594], ["2017-08-26", 0.593], ["2017-08-28", 0.593], ["2017-08-29", 0.594], ["2017-08-31", 0.594], ["2017-09-03", 0.594], ["2017-09-04", 0.595], ["2017-09-09", 0.595], ["2017-09-09", 0.595], ["2017-09-12", 0.595], ["2017-09-16", 0.595], ["2017-09-16", 0.595], ["2017-09-22", 0.597], ["2017-09-25", 0.597], ["2017-09-27", 0.599], ["2017-09-28", 0.6], ["2017-09-30", 0.6], ["2017-10-04", 0.6], ["2017-10-08", 0.6], ["2017-10-09", 0.601], ["2017-10-12", 0.601], ["2017-10-13", 0.602], ["2017-10-14", 0.603], ["2017-10-16", 0.603], ["2017-10-19", 0.603], ["2017-10-20", 0.605], ["2017-10-22", 0.605], ["2017-10-23", 0.606], ["2017-10-25", 0.606], ["2017-10-26", 0.606], ["2017-10-28", 0.606], ["2017-10-29", 0.606], ["2017-10-30", 0.604], ["2017-11-01", 0.604], ["2017-11-03", 0.607], ["2017-11-05", 0.608], ["2017-11-07", 0.608], ["2017-11-08", 0.609], ["2017-11-13", 0.609], ["2017-11-16", 0.61], ["2017-11-18", 0.612], ["2017-11-19", 0.615], ["2017-11-21", 0.614], ["2017-11-22", 0.614], ["2017-11-25", 0.614], ["2017-11-27", 0.619], ["2017-11-29", 0.621], ["2017-11-30", 0.622]] | https://www.metaculus.com/api2/questions/466/ | Not applicable/available for this question. | Politics & Governance | Donald J. Trump is the President of the US as of May 2017. However his term thus far has been beset by a certain level of chaos on many fronts. As a followup to a standing but closed question on whether Trump will still be President in two years, here we extend the timeline to 2019 and the beginning of the next Presidential election.
In addition to the usual mortal risks that might prevent a president from serving the second year of his term, the likelihood of either resignation or impeachment seem distinctly higher in Trump's case than for some previous Presidents-Elect. Between a major FBI investigation, potential leaks of highly classified information, and other issues, there are major uncertainties as to his long-term viability.
This question will resolve true if Donald J. Trump is the President of the United States on Feb 1, 2019. | true | 2017-12-01 | Will Donald Trump be president of the US in 2019? | metaculus | 1 |
2018-01-10 | 2017-05-20 | [] | binary | [["2017-05-20", 0.16], ["2017-05-20", 0.12], ["2017-05-20", 0.187], ["2017-05-20", 0.187], ["2017-05-20", 0.214], ["2017-05-20", 0.217], ["2017-05-20", 0.217], ["2017-05-20", 0.203], ["2017-05-20", 0.215], ["2017-05-20", 0.215], ["2017-05-20", 0.286], ["2017-05-20", 0.28], ["2017-05-20", 0.255], ["2017-05-21", 0.255], ["2017-05-21", 0.261], ["2017-05-21", 0.261], ["2017-05-21", 0.265], ["2017-05-21", 0.237], ["2017-05-21", 0.239], ["2017-05-21", 0.239], ["2017-05-21", 0.239], ["2017-05-22", 0.239], ["2017-05-22", 0.241], ["2017-05-23", 0.241], ["2017-05-23", 0.266], ["2017-05-23", 0.266], ["2017-05-23", 0.273], ["2017-05-23", 0.273], ["2017-05-24", 0.256], ["2017-05-27", 0.259], ["2017-05-27", 0.265], ["2017-05-28", 0.27], ["2017-05-30", 0.267], ["2017-05-31", 0.271], ["2017-05-31", 0.274], ["2017-05-31", 0.269], ["2017-05-31", 0.263], ["2017-06-01", 0.263], ["2017-06-01", 0.255], ["2017-06-01", 0.249], ["2017-06-01", 0.249], ["2017-06-01", 0.247], ["2017-06-02", 0.245], ["2017-06-02", 0.246], ["2017-06-03", 0.246], ["2017-06-03", 0.248], ["2017-06-03", 0.248], ["2017-06-03", 0.248], ["2017-06-08", 0.254], ["2017-06-09", 0.256], ["2017-06-11", 0.258], ["2017-06-16", 0.256], ["2017-06-16", 0.257], ["2017-06-19", 0.259], ["2017-06-19", 0.259], ["2017-06-19", 0.259], ["2017-06-20", 0.256], ["2017-06-20", 0.255], ["2017-06-20", 0.255], ["2017-06-21", 0.257], ["2017-06-21", 0.258], ["2017-06-22", 0.257], ["2017-06-22", 0.254], ["2017-06-22", 0.254], ["2017-06-23", 0.255], ["2017-06-23", 0.254], ["2017-06-26", 0.252], ["2017-06-28", 0.252], ["2017-06-28", 0.248], ["2017-06-29", 0.244], ["2017-06-29", 0.244], ["2017-06-29", 0.244], ["2017-06-29", 0.24], ["2017-06-29", 0.236], ["2017-06-29", 0.236], ["2017-06-29", 0.235], ["2017-06-29", 0.233], ["2017-06-29", 0.236], ["2017-06-29", 0.236], ["2017-06-29", 0.235], ["2017-06-29", 0.235], ["2017-06-30", 0.235], ["2017-06-30", 0.234], ["2017-06-30", 0.232]] | https://www.metaculus.com/api2/questions/467/ | Not applicable/available for this question. | Science & Tech | NASA’s Kepler Mission revealed that the star KIC 8462852, a.k.a. "Tabby's Star" displays severe, aperiodic dips in brightness that have so far defied conventional astrophysical explanations.
Several explanations for this behavior have been put forward, ranging from a family of comets, to the indigestive aftereffects of the consumption of a planet by the star, to a swarm of artificial, orbiting “megastructures.”
Very recently, KIC 8462852 has begun to dim again. Observations taken between May 18th and 19th 2017 show a 2% diminution of light from the star. A variety of telescopes are now being trained on the star, and will obtain data across the electromagnetic spectrum. Included in these follow-up efforts are campaigns that are specifically designed to look for evidence of artificially generated signals. The authors of the Astronomical Telegram describing the current dimming of the star write:
We will continue our monitoring observations using Swift, LCO, and Fairborn, as well as our >spectroscopic observations as part of the Breakthrough Listen program using the APF-Levy >spectrometer at Lick Observatory (27 epochs obtained since Nov 21, 2015). Near-InfraRed Optical >SETI (NIROSETI) on the Nickel 1-m telescope at Lick Observatory has been monitoring Boyajian's >Star, conducting 65 minutes of observations of the star UT 2017 May 20, and will continue to monitor >the star UT 2017 May 21, 22, and 23. We encourage additional multi-wavelength follow-up. >Especially interesting would be lines in the region between H-alpha and the sodium doublet, >inclusive, and thermal infrared measurements.
As of May 20, 2017, no consensus explanation of this star's behavior has emerged. It seems quite plausible, however, that multi-wavelength observations of the star while it is undergoing dimming may serve to sort out the mystery. We thus ask:
Will a consensus emerge in 2017?
We'll use the following criteria to specify consensus. Let N be the number of refereed published journal papers that:
provide an explanation for the aperiodic dips seen in KIC 8462852, and
are cited by at least one published paper, or two preprints, supporting their explanation with additional analysis and/or data, and
are cited at least 5 times in total, and
are not cited by a published, refereed paper refuting the given explanation.
If N=1 we will consider a consensus to have been reached. If N > 1, and if all of the explanations are qualitatively the same, i.e. involving the same essential physics and objects (e.g. "Comet breakup"), we will also consider consensus to have been reached. Otherwise, we will consider that consensus has not yet been reached. | true | 2017-06-30 | Will a consensus explanation of the strange behavior of the star KIC 8462852 emerge this year? | metaculus | 0 |
2017-05-26 | 2017-05-24 | [] | binary | [["2017-05-24", 0.64], ["2017-05-24", 0.57], ["2017-05-24", 0.397], ["2017-05-24", 0.397], ["2017-05-24", 0.255], ["2017-05-24", 0.255], ["2017-05-24", 0.214], ["2017-05-24", 0.214], ["2017-05-24", 0.171], ["2017-05-24", 0.171], ["2017-05-24", 0.139], ["2017-05-24", 0.145], ["2017-05-24", 0.145], ["2017-05-25", 0.136], ["2017-05-25", 0.129], ["2017-05-25", 0.129], ["2017-05-25", 0.143], ["2017-05-25", 0.127], ["2017-05-26", 0.129], ["2017-05-26", 0.142]] | https://www.metaculus.com/api2/questions/470/ | Not applicable/available for this question. | Sports | The last several years have seen stunning advances by artificial Go contestants. Google's AlphaGo program has seen particular success. After sealing a stunning 4-1 victory over Go grandmaster Lee Sedol, an updated version of Alphago, playing in online forums using the account name 'Master', has swept through the Go field, defeating nearly all of the world’s top players in the course of 60 online matches without registering a single loss.
At the Future of Go summit, underway as of this question's writing, AlphaGo is facing off against go master Ke Jie (1-0 AlphaGo as of writing); a sister question asks whether any human can defeat AlphaGo in 2017.
One thing humans have in abundance is numbers, however, and another intriguing event at the Future of Go Summit is a planned 5-on-1 Human vs. AlphaGo team game in which "5 players combine tactics and take on AlphaGo together." (The players are Chen Yaoye, Zhou Ruiyang, Mi Yuting, Shi Yue, and Tang Weixing.)
Will the team of five humans defeat AlphaGo in this match?
The match takes place Friday 26 May (13:30 - 18:30, UTC+8). | true | 2017-05-26 | OK, fine, can FIVE human Go masters defeat AlphaGo? | metaculus | 0 |
2019-12-31 | 2017-05-29 | [] | binary | [["2017-06-01", 0.68], ["2017-06-09", 0.546], ["2017-06-14", 0.645], ["2017-06-20", 0.672], ["2017-06-26", 0.641], ["2017-07-01", 0.621], ["2017-07-09", 0.618], ["2017-07-17", 0.609], ["2017-07-22", 0.58], ["2017-07-28", 0.579], ["2017-08-03", 0.562], ["2017-08-09", 0.519], ["2017-08-14", 0.513], ["2017-08-19", 0.519], ["2017-08-27", 0.519], ["2017-09-03", 0.521], ["2017-09-17", 0.519], ["2017-09-27", 0.519], ["2017-10-04", 0.513], ["2017-10-08", 0.511], ["2017-10-13", 0.513], ["2017-10-21", 0.511], ["2017-10-26", 0.51], ["2017-11-05", 0.512], ["2017-11-08", 0.506], ["2017-11-13", 0.507], ["2017-11-17", 0.502], ["2017-11-25", 0.501], ["2017-12-01", 0.511], ["2017-12-07", 0.508], ["2017-12-18", 0.508], ["2017-12-22", 0.505], ["2017-12-26", 0.504], ["2017-12-31", 0.507], ["2018-01-03", 0.503], ["2018-01-10", 0.5], ["2018-01-18", 0.498], ["2018-01-24", 0.499], ["2018-01-30", 0.498], ["2018-02-04", 0.5], ["2018-02-09", 0.508], ["2018-02-15", 0.506], ["2018-02-20", 0.507], ["2018-02-25", 0.504], ["2018-03-06", 0.503], ["2018-03-10", 0.505], ["2018-03-16", 0.504], ["2018-03-21", 0.508], ["2018-03-26", 0.504], ["2018-03-29", 0.503], ["2018-04-03", 0.502], ["2018-04-07", 0.499], ["2018-04-11", 0.499], ["2018-04-16", 0.497], ["2018-04-21", 0.487], ["2018-04-25", 0.485], ["2018-05-02", 0.483], ["2018-05-09", 0.482], ["2018-05-12", 0.482], ["2018-05-17", 0.482], ["2018-05-22", 0.48], ["2018-05-29", 0.479], ["2018-06-03", 0.48], ["2018-06-06", 0.479], ["2018-06-14", 0.479], ["2018-06-19", 0.48], ["2018-06-26", 0.477], ["2018-06-30", 0.477], ["2018-07-04", 0.474], ["2018-07-09", 0.474], ["2018-07-16", 0.473], ["2018-07-21", 0.47], ["2018-07-26", 0.47], ["2018-07-30", 0.468], ["2018-08-04", 0.468], ["2018-08-10", 0.462], ["2018-08-18", 0.462], ["2018-08-26", 0.46], ["2018-09-01", 0.449], ["2018-09-06", 0.445], ["2018-09-11", 0.442], ["2018-09-17", 0.439], ["2018-09-20", 0.438], ["2018-09-25", 0.437], ["2018-10-02", 0.434], ["2018-10-08", 0.434], ["2018-10-13", 0.432], ["2018-10-20", 0.43], ["2018-10-26", 0.43], ["2018-11-01", 0.428], ["2018-11-07", 0.422], ["2018-11-13", 0.416], ["2018-11-18", 0.416], ["2018-11-23", 0.414], ["2018-11-26", 0.414], ["2018-12-02", 0.412], ["2018-12-10", 0.411], ["2018-12-15", 0.41], ["2018-12-22", 0.407], ["2018-12-29", 0.403], ["2018-12-31", 0.388]] | https://www.metaculus.com/api2/questions/471/ | Not applicable/available for this question. | Economics & Business | Bitcoin (BTC), the first significant blockchain-based "cryptocurrency" has grown from near zero at its advent in 2013 to a market capitalization of about $38B USB as of June 2017 question launch. (see current market cap and time series here.) While Bitcoin is still the largest, hundreds of other blockchain-based currencies have been launched, and some are catching up.
Ethereum (ETH) started trading in 2015, and has reached almost half the market cap of Bitcoin as of June 2017; see current market cap and time series here. Ripple, a third major currency, stands at about half of Ethereum.
Will Ethereum surpass Bitcoin's total market capitalization by 2020?
Resolution will be based on the descendant blockchains of Bitcoin and Ethereum (including Ethereum classic) with the largest market cap at the time. Resolution is positive if at any point prior to Jan 1, 2020, Ethereum's total market capitalization surpasses that of Bitcoin, as reported on coinmarketcap.com, for two consecutive days. (If coinmarketcap.com is discontinued, then resolution will be based on substantially equivalent data or sources.)
For this question, a "descendant blockchain" is: (a) a continuation of a blockchain (e.g., both ethereum and ethereum classic are descendant blockchains of the pre-DAO blockchain), or (b) a snapshot-based fork where a new blockchain is initiated with balances equal to those from a snapshot of the parent blockchain (e.g., the upcoming zencash will be a descendent of zclassic because its genesis block will begin with balances equal to those from a snapshot of zclassic's blockchain, but zclassic is not a descendent of zcash because its genesis block had empty balances). In addition, the date of the snapshot must be after the creation of this question (2017-06-02).
(Edited 06/06/17 to require two consecutive days of resolution satisfaction, and to specify descendent blockchain provisions.) | true | 2018-12-31 | Will the market cap of Ethereum be higher than that of Bitcoin by 2020? | metaculus | 0 |
2017-06-09 | 2017-06-04 | [] | binary | [["2017-06-06", 0.79], ["2017-06-06", 0.8], ["2017-06-06", 0.8], ["2017-06-06", 0.8], ["2017-06-07", 0.8], ["2017-06-07", 0.77], ["2017-06-07", 0.75], ["2017-06-07", 0.763], ["2017-06-07", 0.763], ["2017-06-07", 0.776], ["2017-06-07", 0.786], ["2017-06-08", 0.786]] | https://www.metaculus.com/api2/questions/474/ | Not applicable/available for this question. | Politics & Governance | The Conservative party headed by Prime Minister May called a snap election for June 8 and initially were predicted to win in a landslide as polls showed them getting a share of the votes 20 to 25 percent higher than the Labour party.
This has changed in the last few weeks with the most recent polls showing the percentage difference narrowing to the single digits. One poll even predicted a "hung parliament" where no party has an absolute majority.
Will a single political party win an absolute majority in parliament when the votes are finished counted on June 9 ?
Resolution is positive if official results are announced giving any political particle an absolute majority in the UK elections of June 8. In the case of contested seats as of June 10, resolution will be delayed if and only if those contested seats would affect whether a majority is achieved. | true | 2017-06-08 | Will the UK elections lead to an absolute majority for one party in parliament? | metaculus | 0 |
2020-12-31 | 2017-06-06 | [] | binary | [["2017-06-09", 0.255], ["2017-06-15", 0.201], ["2017-06-19", 0.198], ["2017-06-24", 0.207], ["2017-07-01", 0.205], ["2017-07-17", 0.194], ["2017-07-22", 0.218], ["2017-07-26", 0.218], ["2017-08-04", 0.218], ["2017-08-10", 0.169], ["2017-08-15", 0.166], ["2017-08-18", 0.164], ["2017-08-29", 0.164], ["2017-09-02", 0.153], ["2017-10-07", 0.156], ["2017-10-17", 0.155], ["2017-10-23", 0.158], ["2017-11-18", 0.158], ["2017-12-07", 0.155], ["2017-12-15", 0.157], ["2017-12-17", 0.156], ["2017-12-31", 0.154], ["2018-01-03", 0.152], ["2018-01-10", 0.152], ["2018-02-01", 0.15], ["2018-02-04", 0.147], ["2018-02-12", 0.147], ["2018-02-15", 0.141], ["2018-03-02", 0.139], ["2018-03-10", 0.139], ["2018-03-17", 0.133], ["2018-03-25", 0.142], ["2018-03-29", 0.14], ["2018-04-04", 0.14], ["2018-04-08", 0.14], ["2018-04-12", 0.139], ["2018-04-18", 0.139], ["2018-04-24", 0.152], ["2018-04-28", 0.15], ["2018-05-04", 0.148], ["2018-05-09", 0.145], ["2018-05-15", 0.14], ["2018-05-20", 0.14], ["2018-05-23", 0.139], ["2018-05-28", 0.14], ["2018-06-03", 0.139], ["2018-06-08", 0.137], ["2018-06-12", 0.134], ["2018-06-17", 0.131], ["2018-06-22", 0.13], ["2018-06-29", 0.129], ["2018-07-06", 0.129], ["2018-07-11", 0.128], ["2018-07-15", 0.129], ["2018-07-20", 0.128], ["2018-07-26", 0.131], ["2018-07-30", 0.133], ["2018-08-05", 0.132], ["2018-08-13", 0.135], ["2018-08-20", 0.133], ["2018-08-27", 0.132], ["2018-09-03", 0.134], ["2018-09-06", 0.131], ["2018-09-13", 0.131], ["2018-09-19", 0.13], ["2018-09-25", 0.13], ["2018-09-29", 0.129], ["2018-10-03", 0.132], ["2018-10-08", 0.132], ["2018-10-20", 0.132], ["2018-10-24", 0.136], ["2018-10-31", 0.142], ["2018-11-05", 0.146], ["2018-11-09", 0.152], ["2018-11-16", 0.154], ["2018-11-23", 0.154], ["2018-11-30", 0.155], ["2018-12-18", 0.155], ["2018-12-23", 0.155], ["2018-12-30", 0.158], ["2019-01-02", 0.158], ["2019-01-09", 0.158], ["2019-01-13", 0.157], ["2019-01-18", 0.155], ["2019-01-25", 0.155], ["2019-02-01", 0.154], ["2019-02-18", 0.154], ["2019-02-22", 0.152], ["2019-03-03", 0.152], ["2019-03-09", 0.152], ["2019-03-15", 0.151], ["2019-03-22", 0.144], ["2019-03-27", 0.14], ["2019-04-03", 0.139], ["2019-04-09", 0.14], ["2019-04-16", 0.139], ["2019-04-19", 0.138], ["2019-04-25", 0.138], ["2019-05-03", 0.137], ["2019-05-11", 0.135], ["2019-05-14", 0.126]] | https://www.metaculus.com/api2/questions/475/ | Not applicable/available for this question. | Science & Tech | Mash together drones, Uber, and driverless cars – hallmarks of our age – and you get flying autonomous taxis. Flying cars are almost a cliche in futuristic fiction, but have never been closer to reality.
Multiple companies are developing flying passenger vehicles, including Ehang, E-volo, Airbus AeroMobil, Lilium Aviation and yes, Uber.
Many of these ventures are looking to a 2020 or 2021 date for beginning commercial flying car/taxi operations in the U.S. Airbus' version, Vahana aims to test a prototype this year. Chinese company Ehang has more than 100 test flights under its belt and has already secured permits to begin flight tests in Nevada. Ehang commercial flights are expected to begin this year in Dubai.
Will flying taxis take off in the United States by 2021?
This question will resolve as positive if the first commercial (non-test) flight of an autonomous flying vehicle, carrying at least one passenger, occurs in the United States with full FAA approval on or before December 31, 2020. The passenger must be unaffiliated with the provider of the vehicle, and pay for the service. | true | 2019-05-15 | Flying cars (finally) arriving by 2021? | metaculus | 0 |
2018-12-31 | 2017-06-09 | [] | binary | [["2017-06-13", 0.7], ["2017-06-13", 0.687], ["2017-06-13", 0.687], ["2017-06-13", 0.653], ["2017-06-13", 0.656], ["2017-06-14", 0.67], ["2017-06-15", 0.674], ["2017-06-15", 0.659], ["2017-06-15", 0.667], ["2017-06-16", 0.65], ["2017-06-16", 0.652], ["2017-06-19", 0.642], ["2017-06-19", 0.642], ["2017-06-21", 0.606], ["2017-06-27", 0.606], ["2017-06-28", 0.585], ["2017-06-29", 0.612], ["2017-06-29", 0.609], ["2017-07-26", 0.602], ["2017-08-04", 0.579], ["2017-08-04", 0.575], ["2017-08-06", 0.575], ["2017-08-07", 0.58], ["2017-08-07", 0.577], ["2017-08-12", 0.577], ["2017-09-03", 0.57], ["2017-09-13", 0.57], ["2017-10-08", 0.57], ["2017-10-11", 0.574], ["2017-11-03", 0.577], ["2017-11-07", 0.574], ["2017-11-09", 0.574], ["2017-11-16", 0.566], ["2017-11-16", 0.562], ["2017-11-17", 0.571], ["2017-12-04", 0.571], ["2017-12-06", 0.571], ["2017-12-11", 0.572], ["2017-12-11", 0.572], ["2018-01-07", 0.57], ["2018-01-09", 0.57], ["2018-01-14", 0.571], ["2018-01-14", 0.567], ["2018-01-14", 0.56], ["2018-01-19", 0.557], ["2018-01-21", 0.549], ["2018-01-30", 0.551], ["2018-02-05", 0.551], ["2018-02-07", 0.541], ["2018-02-11", 0.541], ["2018-02-14", 0.544], ["2018-02-14", 0.544], ["2018-02-17", 0.548], ["2018-02-17", 0.548], ["2018-02-22", 0.544], ["2018-02-22", 0.544], ["2018-02-25", 0.537], ["2018-03-02", 0.536], ["2018-03-08", 0.536], ["2018-03-11", 0.532], ["2018-03-14", 0.532], ["2018-03-15", 0.539], ["2018-03-16", 0.54], ["2018-03-16", 0.54], ["2018-03-16", 0.541], ["2018-03-16", 0.541], ["2018-03-17", 0.544], ["2018-03-17", 0.544], ["2018-03-21", 0.545], ["2018-03-23", 0.545], ["2018-03-25", 0.554], ["2018-03-26", 0.544], ["2018-03-27", 0.552], ["2018-03-27", 0.555], ["2018-03-27", 0.557], ["2018-03-28", 0.557], ["2018-03-28", 0.556], ["2018-03-30", 0.556], ["2018-04-03", 0.556], ["2018-04-03", 0.556], ["2018-04-05", 0.556], ["2018-04-05", 0.556], ["2018-04-05", 0.556], ["2018-04-06", 0.557], ["2018-04-07", 0.557], ["2018-04-07", 0.558], ["2018-04-08", 0.559], ["2018-04-08", 0.558], ["2018-04-10", 0.558], ["2018-04-10", 0.56], ["2018-04-10", 0.56], ["2018-04-10", 0.565], ["2018-04-11", 0.561], ["2018-04-11", 0.56], ["2018-04-13", 0.56], ["2018-04-13", 0.561], ["2018-04-13", 0.561], ["2018-04-14", 0.565], ["2018-04-14", 0.57], ["2018-04-14", 0.571], ["2018-04-14", 0.571]] | https://www.metaculus.com/api2/questions/478/ | Not applicable/available for this question. | Economics & Business | Industry "disruption" is a Silicon Valley buzzword. Companies like Netflix and Uber have upended (or just plain ended, in the case of movie rentals) entire industries. Such disruption rarely comes without pushback or controversy, however.
Rentberry is an auction-style market for rental properties. Users submit bids of the price they're willing to pay for monthly rent and security deposit, and landlords decide which bid to accept. The company started in the San Francis area, where median rents for a one-bedroom apartment can top $3,600 per month. Although Rentberry claims that users pay around 4% less for apartments by using the app, an auction framework in a tight market tends toward driving prices up.
Rentberry's business mode drawn some level of ire from various directions. Journalists covering the business have expressed distaste at the prospect of bidding wars and the demise of a semblance of affordable housing in hot urban markets.
Beyond the gut reaction, however, Rentberry may be violating federal law. The Fair Housing Act is designed to prevent housing discrimination for protected classes. Landlords' choice of which bid to accept could result in allegations of discrimination.
As happened with Uber and Airbnb, cities could act to bar or curtail Rentberry in their cities, cutting off access to the priciest and most lucrative pool of apartments.
Other factors could also spell Rentberry's demise, such as a change in market conditions. The company makes money off of a $25 "success fee," so a marked downturn in rental applications could hurt the revenue stream. Alternatively, runaway success could lead to Rentberry's buyout.
With all of these possibilities in mind: Will Rentberry still be in operation with its current business model in 2019?
This question will resolve as positive if the current model of auction-style bidding for apartment is still the operating mode of Rentberry, and that Rentberry is still an operating company, on December 31, 2018. If Rentberry is bought out but still operating under the "Rentberry" brand and under the same business model, this will also count as a positive resolution, but if bought out and subsumed into some significantly different effort resolution will be negative. | true | 2018-04-15 | Will "Rentberry" auction-style apartment rental model succeed? | metaculus | 1 |
2020-03-29 | 2017-06-11 | [] | binary | [["2017-06-18", 0.25], ["2017-06-19", 0.545], ["2017-06-20", 0.554], ["2017-06-21", 0.557], ["2017-06-22", 0.55], ["2017-06-23", 0.558], ["2017-06-24", 0.561], ["2017-06-28", 0.559], ["2017-06-29", 0.533], ["2017-06-30", 0.535], ["2017-07-01", 0.532], ["2017-07-02", 0.525], ["2017-07-07", 0.52], ["2017-07-14", 0.525], ["2017-07-18", 0.527], ["2017-07-18", 0.527], ["2017-07-20", 0.521], ["2017-07-28", 0.521], ["2017-07-29", 0.513], ["2017-08-04", 0.503], ["2017-08-05", 0.482], ["2017-08-06", 0.484], ["2017-08-07", 0.484], ["2017-08-12", 0.485], ["2017-08-14", 0.477], ["2017-08-14", 0.477], ["2017-08-17", 0.477], ["2017-08-19", 0.474], ["2017-09-02", 0.471], ["2017-09-13", 0.468], ["2017-09-16", 0.466], ["2017-10-04", 0.462], ["2017-10-05", 0.462], ["2017-10-07", 0.453], ["2017-10-14", 0.45], ["2017-11-15", 0.45], ["2017-11-17", 0.451], ["2017-11-18", 0.446], ["2017-12-22", 0.439], ["2017-12-24", 0.439], ["2018-01-03", 0.44], ["2018-01-04", 0.444], ["2018-01-09", 0.444], ["2018-01-14", 0.442], ["2018-01-18", 0.442], ["2018-01-25", 0.438], ["2018-01-28", 0.432], ["2018-01-29", 0.429], ["2018-01-30", 0.427], ["2018-02-01", 0.427], ["2018-02-03", 0.424], ["2018-02-05", 0.42], ["2018-02-06", 0.407], ["2018-02-23", 0.407], ["2018-03-09", 0.414], ["2018-03-12", 0.417], ["2018-03-20", 0.417], ["2018-03-21", 0.418], ["2018-03-23", 0.415], ["2018-03-24", 0.414], ["2018-03-25", 0.419], ["2018-03-26", 0.419], ["2018-04-03", 0.417], ["2018-04-05", 0.417], ["2018-04-06", 0.413], ["2018-04-07", 0.411], ["2018-04-08", 0.411], ["2018-04-13", 0.411], ["2018-04-14", 0.412], ["2018-04-17", 0.413], ["2018-04-19", 0.413], ["2018-04-22", 0.409], ["2018-04-22", 0.407], ["2018-04-30", 0.407], ["2018-05-01", 0.407], ["2018-05-10", 0.407], ["2018-05-14", 0.407], ["2018-05-18", 0.404], ["2018-05-23", 0.406], ["2018-05-24", 0.406], ["2018-05-27", 0.407], ["2018-06-02", 0.406], ["2018-06-03", 0.406], ["2018-06-05", 0.406], ["2018-06-06", 0.406], ["2018-06-08", 0.406], ["2018-06-12", 0.399], ["2018-06-12", 0.395], ["2018-06-14", 0.396], ["2018-06-15", 0.396], ["2018-06-16", 0.396], ["2018-06-18", 0.395], ["2018-06-19", 0.395], ["2018-06-20", 0.395], ["2018-06-20", 0.396], ["2018-06-23", 0.396], ["2018-06-25", 0.395], ["2018-06-26", 0.395], ["2018-06-28", 0.392], ["2018-06-29", 0.376], ["2018-06-30", 0.374]] | https://www.metaculus.com/api2/questions/479/ | Not applicable/available for this question. | Politics & Governance | Self-driving trucks are advancing quickly toward reality, and both the economic and the environmental arguments in their favor are quite strong. Major tech-industry players, notably Google and Uber, are making rapid progress. The consensus (as of 6/2017) on this currently open Metaculus question predicts that the first driverless cross-USA cargo truck run will occur in December 2018, a time frame better measured in months than in years.
A recent report commissioned by Intel crisply predicts that autonomous driving (by both cars and trucks) will contribute $7 trillion to the economy, but it devolves to vague and euphemistic palliatives when the future prospects for truckers are discussed. For example, the report notes that autonomous vehicles — in displacing human drivers — will, "create opportunities for transportation companies to utilize the `freed' time of drivers to evolve and enhance their role and impact to the organization."
The Trump administration was voted into office on the strength of support from a demographic that would experience proportionally large job losses if fully autonomous self-driving trucks become a reality. There may, therefore, be grass-roots pressure for legislation that keeps humans in the driver's seats. On the other hand, Trump has repeatedly spoken (and acted) in favor of deregulation generally.
By January 2020, will US Federal regulations be implemented that restrict the operation of trucks without a human operator on board?
For positive resolution, regulations (or laws) must be adopted at the federal (rather than state) level that significantly curtail, delay, or prohibit the adoption of autonomous trucking technologies, arguably for reasons that go beyond pure safety considerations. Evidence to this effect would include citing employment in the text or announcement of the regulations, restrictions that appear to have no viable basis in safety considerations, statements by unions or others to the effect that jobs or workers rights are a significant consideration, etc. | true | 2018-06-30 | Will US regulations that restrict self-driving trucks be implemented? | metaculus | 0 |
2018-07-03 | 2017-06-19 | [] | binary | [["2017-06-19", 0.33], ["2017-06-20", 0.476], ["2017-06-20", 0.462], ["2017-06-20", 0.487], ["2017-06-21", 0.487], ["2017-06-21", 0.411], ["2017-06-22", 0.396], ["2017-06-22", 0.401], ["2017-06-23", 0.388], ["2017-06-24", 0.382], ["2017-06-25", 0.376], ["2017-06-27", 0.375], ["2017-06-27", 0.371], ["2017-06-28", 0.37], ["2017-06-28", 0.363], ["2017-06-29", 0.361], ["2017-06-29", 0.35], ["2017-06-30", 0.357], ["2017-07-02", 0.348], ["2017-07-09", 0.348], ["2017-07-11", 0.351], ["2017-07-12", 0.36], ["2017-07-12", 0.367], ["2017-07-14", 0.36], ["2017-07-17", 0.351], ["2017-07-18", 0.349], ["2017-07-18", 0.347], ["2017-07-21", 0.334], ["2017-07-29", 0.334], ["2017-07-30", 0.331], ["2017-08-04", 0.329], ["2017-08-04", 0.314], ["2017-08-05", 0.314], ["2017-08-07", 0.31], ["2017-08-08", 0.31], ["2017-08-09", 0.306], ["2017-08-09", 0.301], ["2017-08-10", 0.301], ["2017-08-12", 0.298], ["2017-08-14", 0.298], ["2017-08-18", 0.311], ["2017-08-18", 0.311], ["2017-08-22", 0.311], ["2017-08-27", 0.305], ["2017-08-27", 0.305], ["2017-08-28", 0.296], ["2017-08-31", 0.296], ["2017-09-10", 0.289], ["2017-09-11", 0.286], ["2017-09-12", 0.286], ["2017-09-20", 0.281], ["2017-09-22", 0.281], ["2017-09-24", 0.283], ["2017-09-24", 0.283], ["2017-10-04", 0.283], ["2017-10-04", 0.286], ["2017-10-05", 0.288], ["2017-10-08", 0.288], ["2017-10-08", 0.287], ["2017-10-14", 0.288], ["2017-10-14", 0.288], ["2017-10-18", 0.285], ["2017-10-19", 0.285], ["2017-10-20", 0.283], ["2017-10-21", 0.281], ["2017-10-23", 0.283], ["2017-10-29", 0.283], ["2017-11-05", 0.279], ["2017-11-07", 0.279], ["2017-11-12", 0.277], ["2017-11-15", 0.277], ["2017-11-18", 0.275], ["2017-11-20", 0.274], ["2017-11-23", 0.273], ["2017-11-24", 0.273], ["2017-11-24", 0.273], ["2017-11-24", 0.27], ["2017-11-24", 0.27], ["2017-11-29", 0.269], ["2017-12-01", 0.269], ["2017-12-01", 0.266], ["2017-12-02", 0.266], ["2017-12-02", 0.266], ["2017-12-03", 0.265], ["2017-12-07", 0.265], ["2017-12-08", 0.263], ["2017-12-09", 0.26], ["2017-12-10", 0.259], ["2017-12-10", 0.259], ["2017-12-11", 0.259], ["2017-12-12", 0.257], ["2017-12-12", 0.257], ["2017-12-12", 0.255], ["2017-12-17", 0.253], ["2017-12-18", 0.253], ["2017-12-18", 0.252], ["2017-12-21", 0.256], ["2017-12-21", 0.254], ["2017-12-22", 0.254], ["2017-12-23", 0.252], ["2017-12-31", 0.251]] | https://www.metaculus.com/api2/questions/481/ | Not applicable/available for this question. | Science & Tech | In mid-January of 2016, two Caltech Professors -- Konstantin Batygin and Mike Brown -- kicked the news media into high gear by predicting the existence of Planet Nine, a new, but as-yet unseen planet in the outer solar system. Their trans-Neptunian world has an orbital period of about 20,000 years, and a super-Earth mass more than sufficient to bring the planet count back up to nine.
Batygin and Brown's paper, has been downloaded nearly half a million times, and presents indirect dynamical evidence for Planet Nine. Its presence is inferred through the gravitational sculpting that it has produced in the trajectories of the most distant Pluto-like worlds that lie beyond Neptune's orbit.
Follow-up papers by a range of authors have added a mixture of credibility, detail, and skepticism to the Planet Nine hypothesis. During the past year, Planet Nine has been invoked as an explanation for the generation of highly inclined Kuiper belt objects such as Drac and Niku, it has been shown that it can account for curious orbital commensurabilities among the most distant members of the Kuipier Belt, and it has been hypothesized that it can explain the 6-degree tilt of the planetary orbits relative to the Sun's equator.
Based on the host of recent results, Metaculus now calculates a most probable current sky position for Planet Nine of RA=2h, Dec=0 deg. This area of the sky is optimally visible during late autumn for a planet at opposition. At the most probable current location, the planet's current distance would be r~950 AU, and the expected V magnitude is 22.4. A number of groups have engaged in the hunt, and there is something of an emerging consensus that if the planet is to be found, it'll be found sooner rather than later. As an example, Mike Brown gave sixteen months eight months ago. This third update to our original, now closed, Planet Nine question is thus in order:
Will the discovery by direct observation of a new solar system planet having characteristics substantially similar to those described in the Batygin-Brown paper, be announced in a peer-reviewed paper prior to July 1, 2018?
(For this question to resolve as "Yes", the new solar system planet should have an inferred radius larger than that of Earth, an orbital period greater than 5,000 years, and an orbital eccentricity e > 0.25). | true | 2017-12-31 | Will Planet Nine be Discovered by mid-2018? | metaculus | 0 |
2018-09-08 | 2017-06-28 | [] | binary | [["2017-07-01", 0.55], ["2017-07-02", 0.765], ["2017-07-03", 0.827], ["2017-07-04", 0.826], ["2017-07-05", 0.862], ["2017-07-06", 0.758], ["2017-07-06", 0.666], ["2017-07-09", 0.678], ["2017-07-11", 0.678], ["2017-07-11", 0.675], ["2017-07-14", 0.599], ["2017-07-15", 0.574], ["2017-07-17", 0.574], ["2017-07-17", 0.597], ["2017-07-18", 0.582], ["2017-07-18", 0.576], ["2017-07-24", 0.576], ["2017-07-24", 0.583], ["2017-07-26", 0.587], ["2017-08-04", 0.587], ["2017-08-04", 0.554], ["2017-08-06", 0.554], ["2017-08-06", 0.534], ["2017-08-07", 0.53], ["2017-08-08", 0.532], ["2017-08-09", 0.525], ["2017-08-10", 0.509], ["2017-08-10", 0.508], ["2017-08-11", 0.51], ["2017-08-12", 0.507], ["2017-08-12", 0.51], ["2017-08-13", 0.511], ["2017-08-14", 0.507], ["2017-08-15", 0.512], ["2017-08-15", 0.513], ["2017-08-27", 0.513], ["2017-08-27", 0.519], ["2017-08-28", 0.521], ["2017-08-29", 0.523], ["2017-08-30", 0.525], ["2017-08-31", 0.519], ["2017-09-01", 0.517], ["2017-09-22", 0.519], ["2017-09-25", 0.519], ["2017-09-27", 0.514], ["2017-09-28", 0.513], ["2017-09-29", 0.515], ["2017-10-01", 0.515], ["2017-10-04", 0.519], ["2017-10-05", 0.499], ["2017-10-06", 0.492], ["2017-10-07", 0.492], ["2017-10-07", 0.493], ["2017-10-09", 0.492], ["2017-10-09", 0.492], ["2017-10-10", 0.502], ["2017-10-13", 0.502], ["2017-10-14", 0.503], ["2017-10-15", 0.503], ["2017-10-18", 0.501], ["2017-10-28", 0.497], ["2017-10-30", 0.497], ["2017-11-07", 0.495], ["2017-11-08", 0.492], ["2017-11-17", 0.494], ["2017-11-19", 0.491], ["2017-12-07", 0.491], ["2017-12-25", 0.491], ["2017-12-27", 0.487], ["2017-12-29", 0.484], ["2018-01-01", 0.484], ["2018-01-03", 0.483], ["2018-01-03", 0.483], ["2018-01-04", 0.474], ["2018-01-05", 0.473], ["2018-01-06", 0.456], ["2018-01-06", 0.452], ["2018-01-07", 0.451], ["2018-01-08", 0.451], ["2018-01-09", 0.444], ["2018-01-09", 0.434], ["2018-01-10", 0.428], ["2018-01-11", 0.425], ["2018-01-12", 0.422], ["2018-01-13", 0.411], ["2018-01-13", 0.407], ["2018-01-14", 0.405], ["2018-01-16", 0.405], ["2018-01-16", 0.403], ["2018-01-17", 0.401], ["2018-01-18", 0.396], ["2018-01-20", 0.396], ["2018-01-20", 0.396], ["2018-01-21", 0.393], ["2018-01-23", 0.39], ["2018-01-27", 0.39], ["2018-01-28", 0.382], ["2018-01-29", 0.382], ["2018-01-30", 0.37], ["2018-01-31", 0.368], ["2018-02-01", 0.368]] | https://www.metaculus.com/api2/questions/484/ | Not applicable/available for this question. | Science & Tech | No astronaut has launched into space from American soil since the final flight of the space shuttle in 2011. Although the development of commercial space carriers has seen numerous successful launches of cargo, crewed human spaceflight remains the next major milestone.
When NASA's commercial crew development program began in 2009 as an intended replacement for the Space Shuttle, the first crewed flights were expected in 2015.
In 2014, NASA awarded commercial crew contracts to Boeing and SpaceX for their CST-100 and Dragon V2 capsule, respectively. At the time, former NASA administrator Charlie Bolden expected the US to end its reliance on Russian spacecraft by 2017.
Although the schedule has been pushed back since then, the latest target flight dates call for unmanned flight tests for SpaceX and Boeing in November 2017 and June 2018, respectively, followed by crewed launches in May and August 2018. Crew assignments for the first flights could come as early as summer 2017, about a year before launch.
Pressure to meet the deadline comes from NASA's move to not renew spaceflight contracts with Russia beyond the end of 2018. Other pressures are pushing the other direction - following a Falcon 9 explosion in September 2016, NASA has raised concerns about the safety of SpaceX's fueling protocol. Both companies announced scheduling delays as recently as December 2016.
Will the first commercial human spaceflight take place by September 2018?
This question will resolve as positive if a commercial space vehicle launched from the United States, carrying human passengers (even if test pilots), successfully travels to an altitude above 100 km and returns safely to the Earth, as reported by a credible news outlet, after 2010 and on or before August 31, 2018.
(Edit 1/6/18 for clarifications that test pilots/flights count, and that pre-2010 flights do not count.) | true | 2018-02-01 | First commercial crewed spaceflight by September 2018? | metaculus | 0 |
2022-12-19 | 2017-07-10 | ["https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2022_FIFA_World_Cup_controversies#Boycotts"] | binary | [["2017-07-13", 0.625], ["2017-07-13", 0.625], ["2017-07-13", 0.747], ["2017-07-14", 0.77], ["2017-07-14", 0.77], ["2017-07-14", 0.787], ["2017-07-15", 0.81], ["2017-07-16", 0.81], ["2017-07-16", 0.798], ["2017-07-17", 0.781], ["2017-07-17", 0.755], ["2017-07-17", 0.723], ["2017-07-17", 0.723], ["2017-07-17", 0.742], ["2017-07-17", 0.739], ["2017-07-17", 0.739], ["2017-07-18", 0.756], ["2017-07-18", 0.754], ["2017-07-18", 0.754], ["2017-07-18", 0.754], ["2017-07-19", 0.754], ["2017-07-19", 0.714], ["2017-07-19", 0.719], ["2017-07-19", 0.726], ["2017-07-20", 0.733], ["2017-07-21", 0.733], ["2017-07-26", 0.715], ["2017-07-28", 0.71], ["2017-07-28", 0.708], ["2017-07-28", 0.708], ["2017-08-04", 0.713], ["2017-08-04", 0.72], ["2017-08-04", 0.73], ["2017-08-04", 0.732], ["2017-08-04", 0.732], ["2017-08-04", 0.736], ["2017-08-04", 0.743], ["2017-08-06", 0.743], ["2017-08-07", 0.746], ["2017-08-08", 0.73], ["2017-08-08", 0.73], ["2017-08-08", 0.731], ["2017-08-09", 0.736], ["2017-08-10", 0.736], ["2017-08-11", 0.746], ["2017-08-12", 0.746], ["2017-08-14", 0.741], ["2017-08-29", 0.741], ["2017-09-01", 0.738], ["2017-09-04", 0.738], ["2017-09-10", 0.729], ["2017-10-01", 0.727], ["2017-10-02", 0.725], ["2017-10-03", 0.725], ["2017-10-07", 0.727], ["2017-10-18", 0.727], ["2017-10-21", 0.722], ["2017-10-23", 0.721], ["2017-10-24", 0.723], ["2017-11-03", 0.723], ["2017-11-05", 0.721], ["2017-11-07", 0.722], ["2017-11-07", 0.722], ["2017-11-07", 0.725], ["2017-11-08", 0.722], ["2017-11-08", 0.722], ["2017-11-14", 0.714], ["2017-11-15", 0.712], ["2017-11-15", 0.708], ["2017-11-18", 0.711], ["2017-11-24", 0.714], ["2017-11-26", 0.715], ["2017-11-29", 0.715], ["2017-12-03", 0.711], ["2017-12-08", 0.716], ["2017-12-20", 0.716], ["2017-12-21", 0.722], ["2017-12-25", 0.72], ["2017-12-25", 0.718], ["2017-12-26", 0.718], ["2017-12-27", 0.716], ["2017-12-27", 0.717], ["2017-12-29", 0.719], ["2017-12-30", 0.719], ["2017-12-31", 0.719], ["2017-12-31", 0.719], ["2017-12-31", 0.718], ["2017-12-31", 0.718], ["2017-12-31", 0.719], ["2017-12-31", 0.719]] | https://www.metaculus.com/api2/questions/490/ | Not applicable/available for this question. | Sports | In December 2010 it was announced that Qatar had won the right to host the 2022 FIFA World Cup, the most prestigious tournament in international association football.
The decision was controversial for a number of reasons. Suggestions of corruption and bribery fell under an FBI investigation leading to the fall of FIFA President Sepp Blatter. The tournament is traditionally held in the summer, during which the daytime temperature in Qatar can surpass 50 degrees Celsius, making hosting the tournament safely for players and fans a challenge.
In the middle of 2017, Qatar's neighbours Saudi Arabia, Bahrain, and the UAE have cut off diplomatic relations and blockaded the border, accusing Qatar of funding and aiding terrorist organisations, placing the competition under threat.
This question asks:
Will Qatar manage to host the 2022 tournament. It will resolve positively if the World Cup, as sanctioned by FIFA takes place in 2022 in Qatar.
Since there is a possibility of a winter tournament, a World Cup that partially takes place over 2021 or 2023 still resolves positively.
A positive resolution will require all of the matches to be played in Qatar, and for the World Cup to not face a boycott by serious playing nations (which we can define here as any previous winner). | true | 2018-01-01 | Will the 2022 FIFA World Cup go ahead in Qatar? | metaculus | 1 |
2018-02-04 | 2017-07-20 | [] | binary | [["2017-07-23", 0.895], ["2017-07-24", 0.847], ["2017-07-24", 0.847], ["2017-07-24", 0.723], ["2017-07-24", 0.633], ["2017-07-25", 0.616], ["2017-07-26", 0.616], ["2017-07-27", 0.603], ["2017-07-28", 0.578], ["2017-07-30", 0.578], ["2017-07-30", 0.578], ["2017-08-01", 0.531], ["2017-08-01", 0.53], ["2017-08-02", 0.521], ["2017-08-03", 0.514], ["2017-08-03", 0.499], ["2017-08-04", 0.499], ["2017-08-04", 0.515], ["2017-08-04", 0.533], ["2017-08-05", 0.534], ["2017-08-05", 0.531], ["2017-08-06", 0.531], ["2017-08-06", 0.54], ["2017-08-07", 0.54], ["2017-08-09", 0.534], ["2017-08-09", 0.537], ["2017-08-10", 0.544], ["2017-08-11", 0.542], ["2017-08-11", 0.532], ["2017-08-12", 0.527], ["2017-08-14", 0.534], ["2017-08-22", 0.539], ["2017-08-23", 0.54], ["2017-08-23", 0.541], ["2017-08-23", 0.541], ["2017-08-24", 0.542], ["2017-08-24", 0.548], ["2017-08-26", 0.555], ["2017-08-27", 0.555], ["2017-08-27", 0.558], ["2017-08-28", 0.558], ["2017-08-28", 0.552], ["2017-08-29", 0.551], ["2017-08-29", 0.546], ["2017-08-30", 0.544], ["2017-08-30", 0.544], ["2017-08-31", 0.543], ["2017-08-31", 0.543], ["2017-08-31", 0.546], ["2017-09-01", 0.547], ["2017-09-01", 0.545], ["2017-09-02", 0.545], ["2017-09-03", 0.543], ["2017-09-03", 0.541], ["2017-09-04", 0.54], ["2017-09-04", 0.54], ["2017-09-05", 0.54], ["2017-09-05", 0.54], ["2017-09-05", 0.54], ["2017-09-06", 0.54], ["2017-09-06", 0.54], ["2017-09-07", 0.546], ["2017-09-08", 0.546], ["2017-09-08", 0.545], ["2017-09-09", 0.544], ["2017-09-11", 0.544], ["2017-09-11", 0.543], ["2017-09-12", 0.543], ["2017-09-12", 0.543], ["2017-09-13", 0.543], ["2017-09-14", 0.542], ["2017-09-14", 0.541], ["2017-09-15", 0.54], ["2017-09-15", 0.54], ["2017-09-16", 0.54], ["2017-09-16", 0.542], ["2017-09-17", 0.541], ["2017-09-18", 0.542], ["2017-09-19", 0.542], ["2017-09-20", 0.542], ["2017-09-20", 0.542], ["2017-09-21", 0.542], ["2017-09-21", 0.542], ["2017-09-22", 0.542], ["2017-09-22", 0.541], ["2017-09-22", 0.543], ["2017-09-25", 0.543], ["2017-10-01", 0.542], ["2017-10-02", 0.546], ["2017-10-02", 0.546], ["2017-10-02", 0.548], ["2017-10-04", 0.547], ["2017-10-09", 0.547], ["2017-10-09", 0.549], ["2017-10-09", 0.548], ["2017-10-11", 0.548], ["2017-10-13", 0.552], ["2017-10-13", 0.551], ["2017-10-14", 0.539], ["2017-10-14", 0.541], ["2017-10-14", 0.537]] | https://www.metaculus.com/api2/questions/494/ | Not applicable/available for this question. | Science & Tech | One of the goals of Metaculus is to produce well-calibrated probabilistic forecasts. According to the Metaculus FAQ: "Like many mental capabilities, prediction is a talent that persists over time and is a skill that can be developed. By giving steady quantitative feedback and assessment, predictors can improve their skill and accuracy, as well as develop a quantified track record." So, as the size and experience of the Metaculus community increases so should the quality of the predictions generated by it.
Recently, Metaculus assembled an interactive display of its track record so far. Several metric are given, including the Brier score, which is essentially the mean square difference between the prediction and the actual outcome:
where are the predicted probabilities and are the observed outcomes, equal to zero if the question resolved negatively and equal to one if it resolved positively. Brier scores range from zero to one and smaller scores are better, with the ideal score being zero and the worst possible being one.
As of question launch, the mean Brier score for the "Metaculus prediction" is 0.150. The Metaculus prediction was the same as the community prediction until June 2017; thereafter it began to use a more sophisticated aggregation and recalibration scheme that promises more accurate predictions.
But how much more accurate? The "Metaculus post-diction" applies the current aggregation method to old data (excluding each question from the data used for "training"), and should give an estimate of future performance if future questions and predictors are comparable to past ones. As of question launch the "postdiction" Brier score is at 0.10.
Over the next 6 months prior to Jan 23, 2018, of order 25-75 binary questions are likely to resolve, about 1/3 to 1/2 as many as have previously resolved. If the community (and the aggregation) is steadily improving, we'd expect the mean Brier score to steadily drop. We'll ask:
Will the mean Brier score of the Metaculus prediction on Jan 23, 2018 be lower than 0.13?
Resolution will be determined via the Metaculus track record page. | true | 2017-10-15 | Will Metaculus's predictions significantly improve in the next 6 months? | metaculus | 0 |
2018-01-12 | 2017-07-20 | [] | binary | [["2017-07-22", 0.85], ["2017-07-22", 0.85], ["2017-07-22", 0.9], ["2017-07-22", 0.885], ["2017-07-22", 0.845], ["2017-07-23", 0.81], ["2017-07-23", 0.81], ["2017-07-23", 0.77], ["2017-07-23", 0.675], ["2017-07-24", 0.639], ["2017-07-24", 0.639], ["2017-07-24", 0.636], ["2017-07-25", 0.636], ["2017-07-25", 0.628], ["2017-07-26", 0.628], ["2017-07-27", 0.6], ["2017-07-29", 0.611], ["2017-07-30", 0.607], ["2017-07-30", 0.587], ["2017-07-30", 0.587], ["2017-07-31", 0.603], ["2017-08-01", 0.603], ["2017-08-01", 0.603], ["2017-08-01", 0.6], ["2017-08-01", 0.6], ["2017-08-02", 0.593], ["2017-08-04", 0.605], ["2017-08-04", 0.601], ["2017-08-04", 0.613], ["2017-08-04", 0.599], ["2017-08-04", 0.597], ["2017-08-05", 0.588], ["2017-08-05", 0.588], ["2017-08-05", 0.585], ["2017-08-05", 0.582], ["2017-08-05", 0.59], ["2017-08-05", 0.587], ["2017-08-06", 0.584], ["2017-08-06", 0.572], ["2017-08-06", 0.572], ["2017-08-06", 0.58], ["2017-08-06", 0.584], ["2017-08-07", 0.579], ["2017-08-07", 0.58], ["2017-08-08", 0.585], ["2017-08-08", 0.588], ["2017-08-08", 0.588], ["2017-08-08", 0.589], ["2017-08-09", 0.594], ["2017-08-09", 0.586], ["2017-08-09", 0.586], ["2017-08-12", 0.588], ["2017-08-13", 0.586], ["2017-08-14", 0.588], ["2017-08-14", 0.589], ["2017-08-16", 0.588], ["2017-08-18", 0.588], ["2017-08-23", 0.599], ["2017-08-25", 0.603], ["2017-08-29", 0.603], ["2017-08-30", 0.61], ["2017-09-03", 0.608], ["2017-09-03", 0.607], ["2017-09-11", 0.606], ["2017-09-12", 0.606], ["2017-09-18", 0.606], ["2017-09-20", 0.607], ["2017-09-21", 0.605], ["2017-09-23", 0.606], ["2017-09-23", 0.606], ["2017-10-01", 0.605], ["2017-10-01", 0.605], ["2017-10-02", 0.609], ["2017-10-02", 0.611], ["2017-10-03", 0.605], ["2017-10-03", 0.603], ["2017-10-04", 0.604], ["2017-10-07", 0.602], ["2017-10-07", 0.602], ["2017-10-11", 0.602], ["2017-10-14", 0.598], ["2017-10-14", 0.598], ["2017-10-14", 0.599], ["2017-10-16", 0.597], ["2017-10-17", 0.595], ["2017-10-17", 0.595], ["2017-10-17", 0.595], ["2017-10-17", 0.596], ["2017-10-17", 0.574], ["2017-10-17", 0.573], ["2017-10-17", 0.561], ["2017-10-18", 0.558], ["2017-10-18", 0.555], ["2017-10-18", 0.555], ["2017-10-19", 0.551], ["2017-10-19", 0.549], ["2017-10-19", 0.546], ["2017-10-19", 0.546], ["2017-10-19", 0.545], ["2017-10-20", 0.537], ["2017-10-20", 0.536]] | https://www.metaculus.com/api2/questions/496/ | Not applicable/available for this question. | Science & Tech | The Metaculus prediction uses a sophisticated model to calibrate and weight each user, ideally resulting in a prediction that's better than the best of the community.
Over the next 50 questions to resolve, will it achieve that goal?
This question will resolve positive if the Brier score of the Metaculus prediction is lower than the Brier score of each individual user for the next 50 (binary) questions to resolve. This will include every user who has a valid prediction on at least 25 of those questions. For each user included the comparison will be between the Metaculus prediction Brier score over the subset of questions that user has predicted and the user's Brier score for those same questions. | true | 2017-10-20 | Is the Metaculus prediction better than all users? | metaculus | 0 |
2018-01-05 | 2017-07-21 | [] | binary | [["2017-07-22", 0.6], ["2017-07-22", 0.447], ["2017-07-22", 0.447], ["2017-07-22", 0.358], ["2017-07-23", 0.413], ["2017-07-23", 0.426], ["2017-07-23", 0.426], ["2017-07-24", 0.374], ["2017-07-24", 0.438], ["2017-07-25", 0.438], ["2017-07-25", 0.459], ["2017-07-25", 0.432], ["2017-07-25", 0.448], ["2017-07-25", 0.462], ["2017-07-26", 0.47], ["2017-07-27", 0.466], ["2017-07-27", 0.466], ["2017-07-27", 0.466], ["2017-07-28", 0.495], ["2017-07-28", 0.495], ["2017-07-28", 0.493], ["2017-07-28", 0.494], ["2017-07-29", 0.494], ["2017-07-29", 0.521], ["2017-07-30", 0.534], ["2017-07-30", 0.534], ["2017-07-30", 0.542], ["2017-07-30", 0.542], ["2017-08-01", 0.539], ["2017-08-01", 0.54], ["2017-08-01", 0.531], ["2017-08-02", 0.53], ["2017-08-03", 0.535], ["2017-08-03", 0.542], ["2017-08-04", 0.534], ["2017-08-04", 0.54], ["2017-08-04", 0.544], ["2017-08-04", 0.555], ["2017-08-04", 0.555], ["2017-08-04", 0.543], ["2017-08-04", 0.543], ["2017-08-04", 0.532], ["2017-08-04", 0.526], ["2017-08-04", 0.532], ["2017-08-04", 0.528], ["2017-08-04", 0.528], ["2017-08-04", 0.523], ["2017-08-04", 0.523], ["2017-08-04", 0.518], ["2017-08-04", 0.514], ["2017-08-04", 0.51], ["2017-08-05", 0.515], ["2017-08-05", 0.515], ["2017-08-05", 0.519], ["2017-08-05", 0.519], ["2017-08-05", 0.522], ["2017-08-05", 0.523], ["2017-08-05", 0.514], ["2017-08-05", 0.517], ["2017-08-05", 0.517], ["2017-08-06", 0.518], ["2017-08-06", 0.518], ["2017-08-06", 0.516], ["2017-08-06", 0.516], ["2017-08-06", 0.509], ["2017-08-06", 0.509], ["2017-08-06", 0.507], ["2017-08-07", 0.507], ["2017-08-07", 0.508], ["2017-08-07", 0.502], ["2017-08-10", 0.499], ["2017-08-11", 0.499], ["2017-08-11", 0.496], ["2017-08-12", 0.493], ["2017-08-12", 0.489], ["2017-08-14", 0.491], ["2017-08-14", 0.491], ["2017-08-15", 0.49], ["2017-08-15", 0.488], ["2017-08-17", 0.488], ["2017-08-17", 0.481], ["2017-08-18", 0.489], ["2017-08-18", 0.489], ["2017-08-20", 0.49], ["2017-08-21", 0.489], ["2017-08-23", 0.489], ["2017-08-24", 0.485], ["2017-08-24", 0.484], ["2017-08-26", 0.485], ["2017-08-27", 0.485], ["2017-08-27", 0.486], ["2017-08-29", 0.486], ["2017-08-29", 0.484], ["2017-08-29", 0.484], ["2017-08-29", 0.482], ["2017-08-30", 0.481], ["2017-08-30", 0.482], ["2017-08-31", 0.482], ["2017-08-31", 0.478], ["2017-08-31", 0.476], ["2017-09-01", 0.476]] | https://www.metaculus.com/api2/questions/497/ | Not applicable/available for this question. | Politics & Governance | The U.S. presidential campaign of Donald J. Trump is currently under investigation by Special Counsel Robert S. Mueller III. Mueller was appointed Special Counsel by Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein, in the wake of President Trump's firing of FBI Director James Comey. (Rosenstein's boss, Attorney General James Sesssions, had already recused himself from the investigation.)
President Trump has made clear his displeasure in Mueller's investigation, and in some of the possible directions the investigation may take. Having fired once, will Trump fire again?
This question will resolve as positive iff any of the following events occur by January 1, 2018:
Trump successfully fires Mueller
Trump announces that he is firing Mueller, even if it turns out that Trump does not have the authority to fire Mueller directly.
Trump instructs Rosenstein, Sessions, or one of their successors to fire Mueller - either according to statements by Rosenstein or Sessions, or by credible multiply-sourced reporting.
Rosenstein, Sessions or one of their successors resigns, and gives as a reason that Trump requested that Mueller be fired.
Trump fires Rosenstein, or Sessions, or one of their successors, with credible reports indicating that unwillingness to fire Mueller was the triggering event. | true | 2017-09-01 | Will Trump (try to) fire Mueller? | metaculus | 0 |
2018-12-18 | 2017-07-24 | [] | binary | [["2017-07-27", 0.59], ["2017-07-28", 0.59], ["2017-07-28", 0.493], ["2017-07-28", 0.493], ["2017-07-28", 0.516], ["2017-07-28", 0.506], ["2017-07-29", 0.506], ["2017-07-29", 0.497], ["2017-07-30", 0.442], ["2017-07-30", 0.442], ["2017-07-30", 0.443], ["2017-07-30", 0.446], ["2017-07-30", 0.437], ["2017-07-30", 0.437], ["2017-08-02", 0.422], ["2017-08-02", 0.405], ["2017-08-03", 0.411], ["2017-08-04", 0.402], ["2017-08-04", 0.402], ["2017-08-04", 0.392], ["2017-08-04", 0.392], ["2017-08-04", 0.384], ["2017-08-04", 0.384], ["2017-08-04", 0.372], ["2017-08-04", 0.372], ["2017-08-04", 0.37], ["2017-08-04", 0.37], ["2017-08-04", 0.369], ["2017-08-04", 0.369], ["2017-08-04", 0.369], ["2017-08-04", 0.369], ["2017-08-04", 0.396], ["2017-08-04", 0.391], ["2017-08-07", 0.391], ["2017-08-08", 0.391], ["2017-08-12", 0.391], ["2017-08-12", 0.384], ["2017-08-30", 0.384], ["2017-08-31", 0.396], ["2017-09-02", 0.396], ["2017-09-03", 0.397], ["2017-09-04", 0.39], ["2017-09-06", 0.387], ["2017-09-14", 0.401], ["2017-10-01", 0.401], ["2017-10-02", 0.402], ["2017-10-04", 0.406], ["2017-10-07", 0.406], ["2017-10-23", 0.409], ["2017-10-25", 0.406], ["2017-11-03", 0.406], ["2017-11-05", 0.401], ["2017-11-05", 0.409], ["2017-11-07", 0.405], ["2017-11-14", 0.403], ["2017-11-14", 0.402], ["2017-11-14", 0.402], ["2017-11-14", 0.401], ["2017-11-14", 0.393], ["2017-11-14", 0.393], ["2017-11-14", 0.395], ["2017-11-14", 0.391], ["2017-11-14", 0.394], ["2017-11-16", 0.394], ["2017-11-16", 0.398], ["2017-11-18", 0.398], ["2017-11-18", 0.392], ["2017-11-18", 0.388], ["2017-11-19", 0.388], ["2017-11-20", 0.395], ["2017-11-21", 0.392], ["2017-11-22", 0.391], ["2017-11-22", 0.39], ["2017-11-25", 0.392], ["2017-11-29", 0.393], ["2017-12-02", 0.393], ["2017-12-02", 0.393], ["2017-12-03", 0.395], ["2017-12-03", 0.395], ["2017-12-04", 0.396], ["2017-12-05", 0.396], ["2017-12-05", 0.394], ["2017-12-08", 0.389], ["2017-12-10", 0.389], ["2017-12-10", 0.388], ["2017-12-11", 0.388], ["2017-12-11", 0.389], ["2017-12-14", 0.389], ["2017-12-14", 0.389]] | https://www.metaculus.com/api2/questions/499/ | Not applicable/available for this question. | Science & Tech | Since 2005, Florida citrus growers have been plagued by a disease affect their trees called citrus greening disease, or huanglongbing. The disease, which has dramatically impacted the state's citrus production, is carried by two species of psyllid, a flying sap-sucking insect.
To protect the groves, the company Intellectual Ventures has developed a technology originally intended to control malaria-carrying mosquitoes - an array of lasers that zap the psyllids out of the air.
Hear me out.
The array is called the Photonic Fence, and uses cameras to identify only the target pest - psyllids in this case. Any psyllid within the laser's 30 m horizontal or 3 m vertical range is subject to a burst of laser light that heats the psyllid up just enough to kill it.
According to the article:
This summer in Florida, the Photonic Fence will initially be tested against psyllids released inside a screen house, an enclosure of fine mesh used to protect trees from pests. After that, and tests to prove it can avoid targeting bees, the device will be used to replace one wall of a screen house and get its first shot at wild psyllids. Makagon wants to then use several devices to make a perimeter around a block of citrus trees.
Will the Photonic Fence prove its effectiveness?
This question will resolve as positive if prior to October 15 2018, a credible news story or corporate press release from Intellectual Ventures or some another entity owning or licensing the rights to this technology states that states that a test, similar to that described above with a single wall open to the outside, and successfully excluded psyllids from the test grove. (If a fraction is reported, it should correspond to more than 90% of psyllids being killed between entry and when they are able to land on a plant, or some comparable level of success – i.e. like US missile defense, and occasional success is helpful but not really what's desired.)
(Edited 11/14/17 to allows another related organization to do the test using IV's IP.) | true | 2017-12-15 | Successful test of anti-insect Laser fence? | metaculus | 0 |
2018-08-02 | 2017-07-27 | [] | binary | [["2017-07-30", 0.9], ["2017-07-30", 0.695], ["2017-07-31", 0.695], ["2017-07-31", 0.697], ["2017-07-31", 0.703], ["2017-08-01", 0.682], ["2017-08-01", 0.682], ["2017-08-01", 0.694], ["2017-08-02", 0.694], ["2017-08-03", 0.692], ["2017-08-03", 0.692], ["2017-08-04", 0.7], ["2017-08-04", 0.709], ["2017-08-04", 0.754], ["2017-08-04", 0.795], ["2017-08-05", 0.801], ["2017-08-05", 0.803], ["2017-08-05", 0.808], ["2017-08-06", 0.808], ["2017-08-06", 0.81], ["2017-08-06", 0.81], ["2017-08-07", 0.809], ["2017-08-07", 0.812], ["2017-08-07", 0.815], ["2017-08-07", 0.815], ["2017-08-08", 0.816], ["2017-08-08", 0.816], ["2017-08-08", 0.815], ["2017-08-09", 0.815], ["2017-08-09", 0.818], ["2017-08-10", 0.82], ["2017-08-10", 0.825], ["2017-08-11", 0.825], ["2017-08-11", 0.825], ["2017-08-12", 0.825], ["2017-08-13", 0.826], ["2017-08-13", 0.831], ["2017-08-14", 0.831], ["2017-08-15", 0.834], ["2017-08-23", 0.832], ["2017-08-29", 0.832], ["2017-08-31", 0.831], ["2017-09-03", 0.832], ["2017-09-09", 0.834], ["2017-09-14", 0.834], ["2017-09-14", 0.833], ["2017-09-25", 0.833], ["2017-09-26", 0.835], ["2017-10-01", 0.835], ["2017-10-02", 0.833], ["2017-10-02", 0.833], ["2017-10-04", 0.833], ["2017-10-06", 0.833], ["2017-10-09", 0.833], ["2017-10-11", 0.833], ["2017-10-15", 0.832], ["2017-10-17", 0.831], ["2017-10-22", 0.829], ["2017-10-22", 0.829], ["2017-10-23", 0.827], ["2017-11-01", 0.827], ["2017-11-01", 0.829], ["2017-11-02", 0.827], ["2017-11-02", 0.827], ["2017-11-03", 0.827], ["2017-11-03", 0.825], ["2017-11-06", 0.825], ["2017-11-07", 0.825], ["2017-11-07", 0.825], ["2017-11-08", 0.824], ["2017-11-10", 0.824], ["2017-11-11", 0.823], ["2017-11-12", 0.822], ["2017-11-12", 0.82], ["2017-11-13", 0.82], ["2017-11-13", 0.816], ["2017-11-14", 0.816], ["2017-11-14", 0.817], ["2017-11-14", 0.817], ["2017-11-15", 0.816], ["2017-11-16", 0.815], ["2017-11-16", 0.814], ["2017-11-16", 0.814], ["2017-11-17", 0.813], ["2017-11-18", 0.813], ["2017-11-18", 0.814], ["2017-11-18", 0.814], ["2017-11-19", 0.813], ["2017-11-19", 0.813], ["2017-11-20", 0.813], ["2017-11-21", 0.813], ["2017-11-22", 0.814], ["2017-11-22", 0.814], ["2017-11-23", 0.814], ["2017-11-23", 0.811], ["2017-11-24", 0.811], ["2017-11-25", 0.811], ["2017-11-25", 0.81], ["2017-11-26", 0.81], ["2017-11-26", 0.81], ["2017-11-27", 0.809]] | https://www.metaculus.com/api2/questions/501/ | Not applicable/available for this question. | Science & Tech | The endeavor known as "Sci-Hub" has been archiving and making freely available scholarly articles from a wide swath of publishers. Several publishers have sued, decrying this as copyright infringement and piracy.
Recent research estimates that 69% of all scholarly articles ever published are archived on Sci-Hub, including 85% of all articles in subscription journals.
Will Sci-Hub continue to offer free access to these articles for the next year?
This will resolve positively if Sci-Hub or a successor service offering a similarly large selection of journal articles is freely accessible online as of August 1, 2018.
Resolution will be based on the best efforts of site administrators to determine the outcome. | true | 2017-11-27 | Will Sci-Hub be online in August 2018? | metaculus | 1 |
2018-11-06 | 2017-08-07 | [] | binary | [["2017-08-10", 0.08], ["2017-08-10", 0.22], ["2017-08-10", 0.182], ["2017-08-10", 0.205], ["2017-08-10", 0.211], ["2017-08-10", 0.211], ["2017-08-11", 0.203], ["2017-08-11", 0.193], ["2017-08-11", 0.219], ["2017-08-11", 0.225], ["2017-08-11", 0.23], ["2017-08-11", 0.21], ["2017-08-11", 0.223], ["2017-08-12", 0.218], ["2017-08-12", 0.218], ["2017-08-12", 0.219], ["2017-08-13", 0.215], ["2017-08-13", 0.214], ["2017-08-13", 0.214], ["2017-08-13", 0.212], ["2017-08-14", 0.209], ["2017-08-14", 0.207], ["2017-08-14", 0.199], ["2017-08-15", 0.199], ["2017-08-18", 0.205], ["2017-08-18", 0.199], ["2017-08-19", 0.199], ["2017-08-19", 0.198], ["2017-08-19", 0.205], ["2017-08-19", 0.196], ["2017-08-20", 0.192], ["2017-08-20", 0.187], ["2017-08-21", 0.187], ["2017-08-21", 0.184], ["2017-08-21", 0.184], ["2017-08-22", 0.183], ["2017-08-22", 0.183], ["2017-08-22", 0.18], ["2017-08-23", 0.182], ["2017-08-23", 0.18], ["2017-08-26", 0.186], ["2017-08-26", 0.186], ["2017-08-27", 0.185], ["2017-08-27", 0.185], ["2017-08-28", 0.183], ["2017-08-28", 0.182], ["2017-08-29", 0.181], ["2017-08-29", 0.178], ["2017-09-01", 0.175], ["2017-09-03", 0.173], ["2017-09-03", 0.173], ["2017-09-04", 0.173], ["2017-09-07", 0.175], ["2017-09-10", 0.175], ["2017-09-21", 0.187], ["2017-09-21", 0.187], ["2017-09-29", 0.187], ["2017-09-30", 0.188], ["2017-10-01", 0.19], ["2017-10-01", 0.19], ["2017-10-02", 0.191], ["2017-10-02", 0.189], ["2017-10-02", 0.191], ["2017-10-06", 0.19], ["2017-10-07", 0.191], ["2017-10-10", 0.191], ["2017-10-11", 0.192], ["2017-10-13", 0.192], ["2017-10-14", 0.191], ["2017-10-17", 0.188], ["2017-10-17", 0.188], ["2017-10-18", 0.185], ["2017-10-20", 0.184], ["2017-10-21", 0.184], ["2017-10-23", 0.184], ["2017-10-23", 0.186], ["2017-10-25", 0.184], ["2017-10-30", 0.184], ["2017-10-31", 0.183], ["2017-10-31", 0.178], ["2017-10-31", 0.176], ["2017-11-01", 0.175], ["2017-11-01", 0.175], ["2017-11-01", 0.174], ["2017-11-02", 0.173], ["2017-11-02", 0.174], ["2017-11-03", 0.174], ["2017-11-03", 0.174], ["2017-11-05", 0.174], ["2017-11-05", 0.173], ["2017-11-05", 0.172], ["2017-11-05", 0.172], ["2017-11-05", 0.17], ["2017-11-05", 0.169], ["2017-11-06", 0.169], ["2017-11-07", 0.169], ["2017-11-07", 0.17], ["2017-11-07", 0.164], ["2017-11-07", 0.163], ["2017-11-08", 0.163], ["2017-11-08", 0.163]] | https://www.metaculus.com/api2/questions/508/ | Not applicable/available for this question. | Politics & Governance | Trump's presidency has had a rough start. Already starting with a small electoral vote victory, successive scandals and policy defeats have dropped Trump's approval rating down to below 40% as of August 5th 2017, according to most pollsters. Mueller's investigation will likely put further pressure on the Administration, and a possible recession with a currently strong economy would be disastrous.
But all is not lost for Trump. Approval ratings have been historically mean-reverting, with initially unpopular presidents slowly gaining popularity as their presidency continues. BIll Clinton had a sub-40% approval rating six months into his presidency, but eventually rebounded to 60% by the end of his presidency. Even after Ford's rating tanked after his pardoning of Nixon, he managed to (barely) crawl above 50% approval. By keeping further scandals to a minimum, maintaining a strong economy and earning some policy victories, Trump could slowly rebound over the next three years.
On a more morbid note, Bush's popularity skyrocketed after the 9/11 attacks in a "Rally Around the Flag" effect. Another major terrorist attack could likewise spike Trump's popularity, at least temporarily.
By November 6, 2018, will there be a day where Trump's approval rating is 50% or above on 538's aggregate "all polls" approval tracker? | true | 2017-11-08 | Will Donald Trump have a 50% approval rating at some point before the November 2018 mid-term elections? | metaculus | 0 |
2021-01-03 | 2017-08-09 | [] | binary | [["2017-08-13", 0.1], ["2017-08-16", 0.233], ["2017-08-19", 0.237], ["2017-08-23", 0.233], ["2017-08-27", 0.252], ["2017-08-29", 0.245], ["2017-09-02", 0.242], ["2017-09-06", 0.249], ["2017-09-12", 0.25], ["2017-09-16", 0.245], ["2017-09-20", 0.246], ["2017-10-01", 0.248], ["2017-10-04", 0.251], ["2017-10-09", 0.252], ["2017-10-13", 0.25], ["2017-10-18", 0.253], ["2017-11-15", 0.253], ["2017-11-20", 0.254], ["2017-11-24", 0.254], ["2017-11-28", 0.251], ["2017-12-29", 0.249], ["2017-12-31", 0.248], ["2018-01-09", 0.248], ["2018-01-14", 0.259], ["2018-01-15", 0.257], ["2018-01-26", 0.257], ["2018-02-01", 0.25], ["2018-02-17", 0.25], ["2018-03-07", 0.247], ["2018-03-10", 0.242], ["2018-03-13", 0.243], ["2018-03-16", 0.241], ["2018-03-20", 0.232], ["2018-03-24", 0.232], ["2018-03-27", 0.227], ["2018-03-30", 0.222], ["2018-04-02", 0.22], ["2018-04-06", 0.218], ["2018-04-10", 0.215], ["2018-04-15", 0.207], ["2018-04-20", 0.2], ["2018-04-24", 0.2], ["2018-04-28", 0.186], ["2018-05-02", 0.167], ["2018-05-06", 0.167], ["2018-05-10", 0.164], ["2018-05-13", 0.161], ["2018-05-18", 0.158], ["2018-05-23", 0.157], ["2018-05-28", 0.152], ["2018-06-02", 0.152], ["2018-06-06", 0.149], ["2018-06-12", 0.148], ["2018-06-12", 0.148], ["2018-06-21", 0.148], ["2018-06-29", 0.148], ["2018-07-04", 0.146], ["2018-07-07", 0.142], ["2018-07-10", 0.142], ["2018-07-15", 0.141], ["2018-07-18", 0.141], ["2018-07-22", 0.141], ["2018-07-27", 0.14], ["2018-07-28", 0.14], ["2018-08-02", 0.139], ["2018-08-03", 0.138], ["2018-08-12", 0.138], ["2018-08-14", 0.137], ["2018-08-18", 0.136], ["2018-08-22", 0.136], ["2018-08-26", 0.132], ["2018-08-30", 0.131], ["2018-09-01", 0.13], ["2018-09-05", 0.13], ["2018-09-10", 0.129], ["2018-09-12", 0.129], ["2018-09-17", 0.129], ["2018-09-23", 0.126], ["2018-09-27", 0.124], ["2018-10-04", 0.123], ["2018-10-09", 0.122], ["2018-10-12", 0.121], ["2018-10-16", 0.117], ["2018-10-20", 0.117], ["2018-10-25", 0.117], ["2018-10-29", 0.119], ["2018-11-03", 0.115], ["2018-11-07", 0.114], ["2018-11-12", 0.12], ["2018-11-16", 0.122], ["2018-11-20", 0.124], ["2018-11-23", 0.125], ["2018-11-26", 0.125], ["2018-11-30", 0.126], ["2018-12-04", 0.125], ["2018-12-08", 0.124], ["2018-12-13", 0.124], ["2018-12-18", 0.125], ["2018-12-23", 0.124], ["2018-12-28", 0.124], ["2018-12-31", 0.12]] | https://www.metaculus.com/api2/questions/509/ | Not applicable/available for this question. | Security & Defense | Tensions are high in the Korean peninsula, with bellicose rhetoric emanating from both North Korean and US governments.
Will North Korea attack another country, causing greater than one hundred fatalities in a single day before the end of 2020?
This question will resolve positive if greater than 100 deaths in a single 24 hour period are attributed to the North Korean government prior Jan 1, 2021.
Fine print:
The "100 fatalities" does not include North Korean military and civilian deaths, only citizens of all countries other than North Korea.
Any kind of counter-attack counts towards the "100 fatalities" figure – for example if North Korea is attacked by the US and responds by attacking Japan, any Japanese fatalities would count toward the 100.
The "100 fatalities" figure can be met by any/all fatalities coming from multiple countries within the same 24h period as long as each fatality is attributed to an action by the North Korean government.
Resolution is by credible media report, with assessment provided by the US or UK government or United Nations. (In case of major controversy in such assessments, resolves as ambiguous.) | true | 2018-12-31 | Will North Korea attack another country by the end of 2020? | metaculus | 0 |
2018-06-15 | 2017-08-11 | [] | binary | [["2017-08-14", 0.1], ["2017-08-14", 0.125], ["2017-08-14", 0.317], ["2017-08-14", 0.288], ["2017-08-14", 0.292], ["2017-08-14", 0.292], ["2017-08-14", 0.302], ["2017-08-14", 0.296], ["2017-08-14", 0.283], ["2017-08-14", 0.287], ["2017-08-14", 0.296], ["2017-08-15", 0.296], ["2017-08-15", 0.289], ["2017-08-15", 0.289], ["2017-08-15", 0.277], ["2017-08-15", 0.286], ["2017-08-15", 0.286], ["2017-08-15", 0.302], ["2017-08-16", 0.302], ["2017-08-16", 0.302], ["2017-08-16", 0.292], ["2017-08-16", 0.292], ["2017-08-16", 0.297], ["2017-08-16", 0.297], ["2017-08-18", 0.294], ["2017-08-18", 0.326], ["2017-08-18", 0.326], ["2017-08-19", 0.325], ["2017-08-19", 0.315], ["2017-08-20", 0.315], ["2017-08-20", 0.311], ["2017-08-20", 0.307], ["2017-08-20", 0.3], ["2017-08-21", 0.3], ["2017-08-22", 0.3], ["2017-08-22", 0.3], ["2017-08-23", 0.3], ["2017-08-23", 0.294], ["2017-08-24", 0.294], ["2017-08-26", 0.29], ["2017-08-27", 0.289], ["2017-08-28", 0.289], ["2017-08-31", 0.29], ["2017-08-31", 0.29], ["2017-09-21", 0.283], ["2017-09-21", 0.282], ["2017-09-23", 0.283], ["2017-09-24", 0.279], ["2017-09-25", 0.279], ["2017-09-26", 0.284], ["2017-09-26", 0.284], ["2017-09-28", 0.284], ["2017-10-01", 0.285], ["2017-10-04", 0.286], ["2017-10-06", 0.287], ["2017-10-08", 0.286], ["2017-10-09", 0.283], ["2017-10-10", 0.284], ["2017-10-14", 0.286], ["2017-10-14", 0.286], ["2017-10-18", 0.283], ["2017-10-20", 0.283], ["2017-10-22", 0.282], ["2017-10-23", 0.283], ["2017-10-23", 0.281], ["2017-10-24", 0.281], ["2017-10-24", 0.279], ["2017-10-25", 0.286], ["2017-10-26", 0.286], ["2017-10-26", 0.284], ["2017-10-28", 0.282], ["2017-10-28", 0.288], ["2017-10-30", 0.293], ["2017-10-30", 0.298], ["2017-10-30", 0.299], ["2017-10-30", 0.299], ["2017-10-30", 0.305], ["2017-10-30", 0.305], ["2017-10-31", 0.311], ["2017-11-02", 0.319], ["2017-11-02", 0.316], ["2017-11-02", 0.317], ["2017-11-03", 0.32], ["2017-11-03", 0.323], ["2017-11-03", 0.321], ["2017-11-06", 0.318], ["2017-11-06", 0.318], ["2017-11-07", 0.32], ["2017-11-08", 0.32], ["2017-11-09", 0.321], ["2017-11-09", 0.32], ["2017-11-10", 0.325], ["2017-11-10", 0.33], ["2017-11-12", 0.329], ["2017-11-12", 0.332], ["2017-11-12", 0.334], ["2017-11-13", 0.328], ["2017-11-14", 0.328], ["2017-11-14", 0.33], ["2017-11-14", 0.33], ["2017-11-14", 0.334]] | https://www.metaculus.com/api2/questions/510/ | Not applicable/available for this question. | Politics & Governance | The ongoing investigation into the potential role of Russia in the 2016 US Presidential Election has continued to heat up, with appointment by deputy Attorney General Rosenstein of former FBI director Robert Mueller to investigate
any links and/or coordination between Russian government and individuals associated with the campaign of President Donald Trump, and any matters that arose or may arise directly from the investigation.
As of August 2017, news is that Mueller has empaneled a grand jury in Washington DC. A summary of the situation can be found on Wikipedia.
Will any US citizen be jailed in connection with the FBI's investigation of potential coordination between the Trump campaign and Russia?
Resolution is positive if anyone is jailed, even temporarily (e.g. for contempt of congress) in direct connection with or as a result of the Mueller-led FBI investigation, prior to August 15, 2018. | true | 2017-11-15 | Will anyone be jailed by mid-2018 as a result of the Trump-Russia investigation? | metaculus | 1 |
2017-09-14 | 2017-08-12 | [] | binary | [["2017-08-12", 0.4], ["2017-08-12", 0.187], ["2017-08-12", 0.187], ["2017-08-12", 0.265], ["2017-08-12", 0.278], ["2017-08-12", 0.278], ["2017-08-12", 0.333], ["2017-08-12", 0.371], ["2017-08-12", 0.346], ["2017-08-12", 0.344], ["2017-08-13", 0.344], ["2017-08-13", 0.319], ["2017-08-13", 0.32], ["2017-08-13", 0.311], ["2017-08-13", 0.308], ["2017-08-13", 0.313], ["2017-08-13", 0.328], ["2017-08-13", 0.332], ["2017-08-13", 0.326], ["2017-08-13", 0.346], ["2017-08-14", 0.35], ["2017-08-14", 0.35], ["2017-08-14", 0.35], ["2017-08-14", 0.347], ["2017-08-14", 0.365], ["2017-08-14", 0.359], ["2017-08-14", 0.354], ["2017-08-14", 0.336], ["2017-08-14", 0.338], ["2017-08-14", 0.333], ["2017-08-14", 0.333], ["2017-08-15", 0.336], ["2017-08-15", 0.324], ["2017-08-15", 0.323], ["2017-08-15", 0.329], ["2017-08-15", 0.329], ["2017-08-15", 0.32], ["2017-08-15", 0.317], ["2017-08-16", 0.317], ["2017-08-16", 0.319], ["2017-08-16", 0.319], ["2017-08-16", 0.317], ["2017-08-17", 0.309], ["2017-08-18", 0.303], ["2017-08-18", 0.303], ["2017-08-18", 0.329], ["2017-08-18", 0.329], ["2017-08-18", 0.329], ["2017-08-19", 0.324], ["2017-08-19", 0.315], ["2017-08-20", 0.309], ["2017-08-20", 0.312], ["2017-08-21", 0.312], ["2017-08-22", 0.305], ["2017-08-22", 0.305], ["2017-08-22", 0.304], ["2017-08-23", 0.297], ["2017-08-23", 0.31], ["2017-08-23", 0.313], ["2017-08-23", 0.313], ["2017-08-23", 0.313], ["2017-08-24", 0.306], ["2017-08-24", 0.313], ["2017-08-24", 0.313], ["2017-08-24", 0.318], ["2017-08-25", 0.322], ["2017-08-25", 0.319], ["2017-08-26", 0.315], ["2017-08-27", 0.315], ["2017-08-27", 0.32], ["2017-08-28", 0.319], ["2017-08-29", 0.323], ["2017-08-29", 0.323], ["2017-08-30", 0.319], ["2017-08-30", 0.319], ["2017-08-30", 0.314], ["2017-08-30", 0.314], ["2017-08-31", 0.311], ["2017-08-31", 0.31], ["2017-08-31", 0.312], ["2017-08-31", 0.312], ["2017-08-31", 0.305], ["2017-08-31", 0.305], ["2017-08-31", 0.315], ["2017-08-31", 0.315]] | https://www.metaculus.com/api2/questions/511/ | Not applicable/available for this question. | Economics & Business | In the popular financial press, the VIX Index is often referred to as the "fear gauge". In reality, it is a quantitative assessment of expected stock market volatility over the next thirty day period, and is computed from S&P 500 stock index option prices.
To rule-of-thumb accuracy, the numerical value of the VIX corresponds to the annualized one-sigma percentage change in the value of the S&P 500 Index over the next month. At present, the VIX stands just below 16, so very roughly speaking, this means that the market ascribes a 30% chance that stocks will have changed in price by more than 4.5% by mid-September 2018.
Typically, the value of the VIX lies between 12 and 20, but it regularly spikes during times of market turmoil. During the 2008 financial crisis, for example, the VIX briefly reached values above 80. So far during 2017, and as recently as last week, stock volatility has consistently tested near-record low levels, but recent jitters surrounding the situation on the Korean peninsula have caused the index to spike by more than 50%.
Prior to September 12, 2017, will the VIX Index have an intra-day print with a value above 25? | true | 2017-08-31 | A jump in market volatility over the coming month? | metaculus | 0 |
2017-10-30 | 2017-08-13 | [] | binary | [["2017-08-16", 0.3], ["2017-08-16", 0.3], ["2017-08-16", 0.283], ["2017-08-16", 0.283], ["2017-08-16", 0.336], ["2017-08-16", 0.33], ["2017-08-16", 0.354], ["2017-08-16", 0.354], ["2017-08-16", 0.359], ["2017-08-17", 0.333], ["2017-08-17", 0.333], ["2017-08-17", 0.345], ["2017-08-18", 0.33], ["2017-08-18", 0.336], ["2017-08-19", 0.315], ["2017-08-19", 0.322], ["2017-08-20", 0.321], ["2017-08-20", 0.314], ["2017-08-20", 0.308], ["2017-08-20", 0.308], ["2017-08-20", 0.293], ["2017-08-20", 0.286], ["2017-08-22", 0.286], ["2017-08-23", 0.284], ["2017-08-23", 0.294], ["2017-08-23", 0.294], ["2017-08-23", 0.286], ["2017-08-24", 0.287], ["2017-08-24", 0.29], ["2017-08-25", 0.304], ["2017-08-25", 0.306], ["2017-08-26", 0.306], ["2017-08-26", 0.304], ["2017-08-27", 0.304], ["2017-08-28", 0.295], ["2017-08-31", 0.293], ["2017-08-31", 0.293], ["2017-08-31", 0.303], ["2017-08-31", 0.305], ["2017-08-31", 0.305], ["2017-09-04", 0.306], ["2017-09-04", 0.308], ["2017-09-05", 0.308], ["2017-09-06", 0.308], ["2017-09-08", 0.304], ["2017-09-08", 0.303], ["2017-09-11", 0.298], ["2017-09-14", 0.298], ["2017-09-14", 0.293], ["2017-09-14", 0.289], ["2017-09-14", 0.289], ["2017-09-14", 0.286], ["2017-09-14", 0.285], ["2017-09-14", 0.282], ["2017-09-14", 0.273], ["2017-09-14", 0.273], ["2017-09-14", 0.268], ["2017-09-14", 0.263], ["2017-09-14", 0.262], ["2017-09-14", 0.259], ["2017-09-14", 0.259], ["2017-09-15", 0.259], ["2017-09-15", 0.258]] | https://www.metaculus.com/api2/questions/515/ | Not applicable/available for this question. | Politics & Governance | The ongoing investigation into the potential role of Russia in the 2016 US Presidential Election has continued to heat up, with appointment by deputy Attorney General Rosenstein of former FBI director Robert Mueller.
Paul Manafort was Trump's campaign manager from June to mid-August 2016, and was reportedly present at the June 9 meeting with Russian attorney Natalia Veselnitskaya and several others at Trump Tower.
As of August 2017, news is that Mueller has empaneled a grand jury in Washington DC, and recently searched a home of Manafort.
Will Paul Manafort be charged with any crime by October 31, 2017?
Resolution is positive if credible media report indicates that Manafort has been formally charged prior to Oct. 31. | true | 2017-09-15 | Will Paul Manafort be charged with a crime by Halloween? | metaculus | 1 |
2019-02-06 | 2017-08-15 | [] | binary | [["2017-08-16", 0.1], ["2017-08-17", 0.425], ["2017-08-19", 0.504], ["2017-08-22", 0.521], ["2017-08-23", 0.519], ["2017-08-26", 0.52], ["2017-08-28", 0.542], ["2017-08-31", 0.556], ["2017-09-03", 0.565], ["2017-09-05", 0.569], ["2017-09-07", 0.576], ["2017-09-13", 0.571], ["2017-09-13", 0.571], ["2017-09-22", 0.574], ["2017-10-01", 0.574], ["2017-10-07", 0.574], ["2017-10-31", 0.571], ["2017-11-02", 0.572], ["2017-11-04", 0.57], ["2017-11-07", 0.569], ["2017-11-12", 0.569], ["2017-11-13", 0.565], ["2017-11-19", 0.561], ["2017-11-20", 0.56], ["2017-12-03", 0.56], ["2017-12-16", 0.56], ["2017-12-29", 0.561], ["2017-12-31", 0.56], ["2018-01-04", 0.558], ["2018-01-06", 0.56], ["2018-01-09", 0.561], ["2018-01-12", 0.561], ["2018-01-14", 0.561], ["2018-01-18", 0.56], ["2018-01-20", 0.551], ["2018-01-25", 0.549], ["2018-02-01", 0.548], ["2018-02-03", 0.546], ["2018-02-06", 0.544], ["2018-02-07", 0.546], ["2018-02-10", 0.544], ["2018-02-12", 0.552], ["2018-02-14", 0.557], ["2018-02-17", 0.561], ["2018-03-07", 0.561], ["2018-03-09", 0.561], ["2018-03-11", 0.563], ["2018-03-12", 0.562], ["2018-03-16", 0.56], ["2018-03-17", 0.551], ["2018-03-23", 0.551], ["2018-03-24", 0.553], ["2018-03-27", 0.558], ["2018-03-30", 0.56], ["2018-04-01", 0.559], ["2018-04-03", 0.558], ["2018-04-05", 0.556], ["2018-04-08", 0.556], ["2018-04-11", 0.557], ["2018-04-12", 0.56], ["2018-04-15", 0.561], ["2018-04-17", 0.563], ["2018-04-19", 0.54], ["2018-04-22", 0.534], ["2018-04-25", 0.538], ["2018-04-27", 0.536], ["2018-04-29", 0.535], ["2018-05-02", 0.531], ["2018-05-05", 0.531], ["2018-05-09", 0.531], ["2018-05-10", 0.527], ["2018-05-16", 0.527], ["2018-05-17", 0.528], ["2018-05-20", 0.525], ["2018-05-24", 0.525], ["2018-05-27", 0.523], ["2018-05-29", 0.523], ["2018-05-31", 0.523], ["2018-06-03", 0.524], ["2018-06-05", 0.519], ["2018-06-08", 0.516], ["2018-06-11", 0.511], ["2018-06-14", 0.51], ["2018-06-16", 0.509], ["2018-06-19", 0.507], ["2018-06-21", 0.506], ["2018-06-24", 0.506], ["2018-06-27", 0.505], ["2018-07-01", 0.504], ["2018-07-04", 0.503], ["2018-07-06", 0.503], ["2018-07-09", 0.506], ["2018-07-12", 0.504], ["2018-07-15", 0.503], ["2018-07-16", 0.503], ["2018-07-19", 0.503], ["2018-07-22", 0.505], ["2018-07-22", 0.505], ["2018-07-26", 0.506], ["2018-07-30", 0.507], ["2018-08-01", 0.494]] | https://www.metaculus.com/api2/questions/516/ | Not applicable/available for this question. | Environment & Energy | Ice cream melts faster than it used to.
In 2016, the average global temperature, according to the NASA Goddard Institute for Space Sciences (GISS) data analysis, was the warmest on record, besting the previous mark which was set in 2015. Earth has something of a streak going -- the last three years have all been global temperature record setters.
There is unambiguous evidence that climate change, driven by increasing atmospheric CO2 concentration (as well as other greenhouse gases), is responsible for the relentless upward trend. Nonetheless, stochastic variations do lend a short-term veneer of unpredictability to near-term measurements.
A recently closed Metaculus question that asked whether 2017 will break the global heat record was quite popular -- 327 predictions were registered, with the community of predictors ascribing a median 46% chance of going over the top. Given the interest, it seems reasonable to roll the question out for the coming year:
Will 2018 again set a new record? Or will it fall off the recent record-setting pace?
This will resolve in the positive if the NASA GISS global average temperature for 2018 is published above that of any prior year for which records exist. As a practical matter, this will be either 2016 or (possibly) 2017. | true | 2018-08-01 | Will 2018 be the warmest year on record? | metaculus | 0 |
2020-01-16 | 2017-08-15 | [] | binary | [["2018-09-21", 0.455], ["2018-09-23", 0.392], ["2018-09-25", 0.498], ["2018-09-28", 0.555], ["2018-10-01", 0.575], ["2018-10-02", 0.574], ["2018-10-06", 0.576], ["2018-10-09", 0.575], ["2018-10-10", 0.58], ["2018-10-13", 0.577], ["2018-10-15", 0.577], ["2018-10-17", 0.578], ["2018-10-19", 0.578], ["2018-10-21", 0.579], ["2018-10-25", 0.579], ["2018-10-27", 0.578], ["2018-10-29", 0.578], ["2018-11-01", 0.576], ["2018-11-04", 0.571], ["2018-11-07", 0.57], ["2018-11-09", 0.57], ["2018-11-13", 0.57], ["2018-11-16", 0.573], ["2018-11-17", 0.573], ["2018-11-20", 0.57], ["2018-11-23", 0.569], ["2018-11-26", 0.569], ["2018-12-04", 0.569], ["2018-12-04", 0.569], ["2018-12-12", 0.569], ["2018-12-18", 0.567], ["2018-12-18", 0.566], ["2018-12-23", 0.567], ["2018-12-23", 0.566], ["2018-12-27", 0.566], ["2018-12-27", 0.566], ["2019-01-01", 0.567], ["2019-01-04", 0.565], ["2019-01-06", 0.563], ["2019-01-08", 0.565], ["2019-01-13", 0.565], ["2019-01-16", 0.565], ["2019-01-17", 0.565], ["2019-01-19", 0.563], ["2019-01-21", 0.562], ["2019-01-25", 0.561], ["2019-01-28", 0.555], ["2019-01-29", 0.554], ["2019-02-03", 0.554], ["2019-02-04", 0.554], ["2019-02-07", 0.554], ["2019-02-10", 0.551], ["2019-02-12", 0.551], ["2019-02-15", 0.551], ["2019-02-18", 0.552], ["2019-02-24", 0.55], ["2019-02-27", 0.554], ["2019-03-02", 0.554], ["2019-03-04", 0.554], ["2019-03-06", 0.555], ["2019-03-15", 0.555], ["2019-03-17", 0.555], ["2019-03-28", 0.555], ["2019-03-30", 0.555], ["2019-04-03", 0.555], ["2019-04-12", 0.555], ["2019-04-15", 0.555], ["2019-04-30", 0.555], ["2019-05-02", 0.555], ["2019-05-05", 0.555], ["2019-05-11", 0.555], ["2019-05-14", 0.555], ["2019-05-17", 0.555], ["2019-05-21", 0.555], ["2019-05-21", 0.555], ["2019-05-27", 0.555], ["2019-06-02", 0.556], ["2019-06-04", 0.551], ["2019-06-06", 0.536], ["2019-06-09", 0.531], ["2019-06-11", 0.531], ["2019-06-14", 0.53], ["2019-06-16", 0.529], ["2019-06-18", 0.529], ["2019-06-21", 0.529], ["2019-06-23", 0.528], ["2019-06-25", 0.526], ["2019-06-28", 0.527], ["2019-06-30", 0.526], ["2019-07-03", 0.526], ["2019-07-05", 0.526], ["2019-07-08", 0.526], ["2019-07-10", 0.524], ["2019-07-15", 0.524], ["2019-07-18", 0.522], ["2019-07-20", 0.525], ["2019-07-21", 0.523], ["2019-07-25", 0.521], ["2019-07-28", 0.514], ["2019-07-31", 0.495], ["2019-08-01", 0.49]] | https://www.metaculus.com/api2/questions/1455/ | Not applicable/available for this question. | Environment & Energy | Ice cream melts faster than it used to.
In 2016, the average global temperature, according to the NASA Goddard Institute for Space Sciences (GISS) data analysis, was the warmest on record, besting the previous mark which was set in 2015. Earth has something of a streak going -- the last three full calendar years have cumulatively been the three warmest years on record.
There is unambiguous evidence that climate change, driven by increasing atmospheric CO2 concentration (as well as other greenhouse gases), is responsible for the relentless upward trend. Nonetheless, stochastic variations do lend a short-term veneer of unpredictability to near-term measurements.
A recently closed Metaculus question that asked whether 2018 will break the global heat record was quite popular -- 458 predictions were registered, with the community of predictors ascribing a median 33% chance of going over the top. Given the interest, it seems reasonable to roll the question out for the coming year:
Will 2019 again set a new record? Or will it fall off the recent record-setting pace?
This will resolve in the positive if the NASA GISS global average temperature for 2019 is published above that of any prior year for which records exist. As a practical matter, this will be either 2016 or (possibly) 2018. | true | 2019-08-01 | Will 2019 be the warmest year on record? | metaculus | 0 |
2017-11-12 | 2017-08-17 | [] | binary | [["2017-08-20", 0.15], ["2017-08-20", 0.15], ["2017-08-20", 0.133], ["2017-08-20", 0.133], ["2017-08-20", 0.112], ["2017-08-20", 0.152], ["2017-08-20", 0.128], ["2017-08-20", 0.111], ["2017-08-20", 0.111], ["2017-08-20", 0.12], ["2017-08-21", 0.12], ["2017-08-22", 0.118], ["2017-08-22", 0.153], ["2017-08-22", 0.153], ["2017-08-22", 0.138], ["2017-08-22", 0.138], ["2017-08-22", 0.137], ["2017-08-22", 0.132], ["2017-08-22", 0.13], ["2017-08-23", 0.131], ["2017-08-23", 0.138], ["2017-08-23", 0.139], ["2017-08-23", 0.137], ["2017-08-24", 0.14], ["2017-08-24", 0.14], ["2017-08-24", 0.14], ["2017-08-24", 0.142], ["2017-08-26", 0.148], ["2017-08-27", 0.148], ["2017-08-27", 0.142], ["2017-08-31", 0.144], ["2017-08-31", 0.152], ["2017-08-31", 0.153], ["2017-09-01", 0.155], ["2017-09-03", 0.155], ["2017-09-05", 0.154], ["2017-09-07", 0.16], ["2017-09-07", 0.156], ["2017-09-08", 0.155], ["2017-09-08", 0.156], ["2017-09-10", 0.159], ["2017-09-11", 0.157], ["2017-09-13", 0.156], ["2017-09-14", 0.156], ["2017-09-15", 0.148], ["2017-09-15", 0.148], ["2017-09-16", 0.152], ["2017-09-16", 0.152], ["2017-09-16", 0.149], ["2017-09-16", 0.15], ["2017-09-17", 0.15], ["2017-09-18", 0.15], ["2017-09-19", 0.163], ["2017-09-20", 0.163], ["2017-09-20", 0.163], ["2017-09-20", 0.161], ["2017-09-20", 0.158], ["2017-09-20", 0.16], ["2017-09-20", 0.159], ["2017-09-21", 0.158], ["2017-09-21", 0.158], ["2017-09-21", 0.155], ["2017-09-22", 0.149], ["2017-09-23", 0.148], ["2017-09-23", 0.146], ["2017-09-24", 0.144], ["2017-09-24", 0.142], ["2017-09-24", 0.141], ["2017-09-25", 0.141], ["2017-09-25", 0.141], ["2017-09-25", 0.14], ["2017-09-25", 0.146], ["2017-09-26", 0.146], ["2017-09-26", 0.145], ["2017-09-26", 0.145], ["2017-09-27", 0.145], ["2017-09-27", 0.151], ["2017-09-27", 0.151], ["2017-09-27", 0.152], ["2017-09-27", 0.151], ["2017-09-27", 0.153], ["2017-09-27", 0.154], ["2017-09-27", 0.155], ["2017-09-27", 0.158], ["2017-09-28", 0.157], ["2017-09-29", 0.157], ["2017-09-29", 0.157], ["2017-09-29", 0.156], ["2017-09-29", 0.156], ["2017-09-29", 0.156], ["2017-09-29", 0.155]] | https://www.metaculus.com/api2/questions/517/ | Not applicable/available for this question. | Politics & Governance | The ongoing investigation into the potential role of Russia in the 2016 US Presidential Election has continued to heat up, with appointment by deputy Attorney General Rosenstein of former FBI director Robert Mueller.
Michael Flynn was Trump's national security advisor for about three weeks starting Jan 20, 2017. Per Wikipedia:
Flynn was forced to resign as Trump's National Security Advisor after information surfaced that he had lied to Vice President Mike Pence about the nature and content of his communications with the Russian ambassador to the U.S., Sergey Kislyak. Flynn's tenure of just 24 days was the shortest in the history of the office. On April 27, 2017, the Pentagon inspector general announced an investigation into whether Flynn had accepted money from foreign governments without the required approval. Flynn initially refused to hand over subpoenaed documents to the Senate Intelligence Committee, pleading the Fifth Amendment against self-incrimination, but a compromise with the committee was worked out
Flynn appears to be a subject of Mueller's investigation. As of August, the NYT reports that
Investigators working for the special counsel, Robert S. Mueller III, recently asked the White House for documents related to the former national security adviser Michael T. Flynn, and have questioned witnesses about whether he was secretly paid by the Turkish government during the final months of the presidential campaign, according to people close to the investigation.
Will Michael Flynn be charged with any crime by November 11, 2017?
Resolution is positive if credible media report indicates that Flynn has been formally charged prior to Nov. 11. | true | 2017-09-30 | Will Michael Flynn be charged with a crime by Veteran's day? | metaculus | 0 |
2018-07-01 | 2017-08-18 | ["https://trends.google.com/trends/explore?date=all&q=russia"] | binary | [["2017-08-20", 0.4], ["2017-08-20", 0.35], ["2017-08-20", 0.3], ["2017-08-20", 0.288], ["2017-08-20", 0.288], ["2017-08-20", 0.243], ["2017-08-20", 0.243], ["2017-08-20", 0.259], ["2017-08-21", 0.301], ["2017-08-21", 0.301], ["2017-08-21", 0.301], ["2017-08-22", 0.311], ["2017-08-22", 0.335], ["2017-08-22", 0.357], ["2017-08-23", 0.357], ["2017-08-23", 0.375], ["2017-08-23", 0.374], ["2017-08-23", 0.388], ["2017-08-23", 0.367], ["2017-08-23", 0.385], ["2017-08-23", 0.392], ["2017-08-23", 0.396], ["2017-08-24", 0.408], ["2017-08-24", 0.414], ["2017-08-25", 0.414], ["2017-08-25", 0.426], ["2017-08-25", 0.444], ["2017-08-26", 0.459], ["2017-08-28", 0.459], ["2017-08-29", 0.478], ["2017-08-31", 0.478], ["2017-09-02", 0.48], ["2017-09-05", 0.488], ["2017-09-07", 0.484], ["2017-09-15", 0.484], ["2017-10-01", 0.502], ["2017-10-02", 0.502], ["2017-10-04", 0.517], ["2017-10-07", 0.517], ["2017-10-08", 0.51], ["2017-10-08", 0.511], ["2017-10-17", 0.515], ["2017-10-23", 0.515], ["2017-10-30", 0.515], ["2017-10-30", 0.514], ["2017-10-31", 0.514], ["2017-11-01", 0.521], ["2017-11-02", 0.517], ["2017-11-02", 0.521], ["2017-11-05", 0.521], ["2017-11-06", 0.522], ["2017-11-06", 0.523], ["2017-11-07", 0.52], ["2017-11-07", 0.52], ["2017-11-12", 0.523], ["2017-11-12", 0.52], ["2017-11-13", 0.528], ["2017-11-14", 0.528], ["2017-11-15", 0.532], ["2017-11-17", 0.532], ["2017-11-17", 0.539], ["2017-11-18", 0.539], ["2017-11-19", 0.538], ["2017-11-26", 0.538], ["2017-11-26", 0.539], ["2017-11-27", 0.539], ["2017-11-27", 0.542], ["2017-11-29", 0.542], ["2017-11-30", 0.542], ["2017-12-03", 0.542], ["2017-12-04", 0.541], ["2017-12-04", 0.541], ["2017-12-05", 0.541], ["2017-12-06", 0.538], ["2017-12-11", 0.541], ["2017-12-13", 0.54], ["2017-12-16", 0.537], ["2017-12-19", 0.535], ["2017-12-20", 0.53], ["2017-12-20", 0.528], ["2017-12-21", 0.528], ["2017-12-21", 0.521], ["2017-12-21", 0.53], ["2017-12-21", 0.528], ["2017-12-21", 0.528], ["2017-12-21", 0.528], ["2017-12-21", 0.529], ["2017-12-22", 0.538], ["2017-12-23", 0.536], ["2017-12-30", 0.536], ["2017-12-30", 0.538], ["2017-12-30", 0.541], ["2017-12-30", 0.541]] | https://www.metaculus.com/api2/questions/518/ | Not applicable/available for this question. | Politics & Governance | Google trends, according to Wikipedia, "is a public web facility of Google Inc., based on Google Search, that shows how often a particular search-term is entered relative to the total search-volume." Numbers are recorded since 2004. For the search term "russia" the month with the highest search volume in "russia" was February 2013 (meteor explosion), followed by March 2014 (Ukraine crisis). The graph for search volume over all time can be accessed by this URL: https://trends.google.com/trends/explore?date=all&q=russia
Will the google trend graph for "russia", showing values of all time, will have a value of 100 for one month of 2018? (Which means that that month has the most search volume over the time range displayed.)
In 2018, the FIFA world cup will take place in Russia, an event guaranteed to raise global interest. | true | 2017-12-30 | Will there be a new all-time peak in google trends for "russia" by 2019? | metaculus | 1 |
2019-06-13 | 2017-08-19 | [] | binary | [["2017-08-26", 0.3], ["2017-08-26", 0.3], ["2017-08-26", 0.267], ["2017-08-27", 0.267], ["2017-08-27", 0.198], ["2017-08-28", 0.19], ["2017-08-28", 0.191], ["2017-08-28", 0.191], ["2017-08-28", 0.191], ["2017-08-28", 0.186], ["2017-08-29", 0.162], ["2017-08-29", 0.166], ["2017-08-29", 0.165], ["2017-08-31", 0.19], ["2017-08-31", 0.183], ["2017-09-03", 0.174], ["2017-09-14", 0.174], ["2017-09-24", 0.189], ["2017-09-25", 0.189], ["2017-10-01", 0.201], ["2017-10-08", 0.201], ["2017-10-18", 0.199], ["2017-11-06", 0.189], ["2017-11-07", 0.185], ["2017-11-15", 0.197], ["2017-11-25", 0.197], ["2017-12-22", 0.205], ["2017-12-23", 0.204], ["2017-12-28", 0.204], ["2017-12-30", 0.197], ["2018-01-03", 0.204], ["2018-01-03", 0.204], ["2018-01-03", 0.205], ["2018-01-03", 0.21], ["2018-01-03", 0.21], ["2018-01-04", 0.217], ["2018-01-05", 0.221], ["2018-01-05", 0.222], ["2018-01-05", 0.224], ["2018-01-07", 0.221], ["2018-01-08", 0.221], ["2018-01-09", 0.229], ["2018-01-09", 0.229], ["2018-01-09", 0.237], ["2018-01-10", 0.236], ["2018-01-10", 0.236], ["2018-01-10", 0.234], ["2018-01-11", 0.23], ["2018-01-12", 0.233], ["2018-01-16", 0.226], ["2018-01-16", 0.226], ["2018-01-17", 0.229], ["2018-01-18", 0.229], ["2018-01-18", 0.23], ["2018-01-19", 0.23], ["2018-01-19", 0.232], ["2018-01-20", 0.232]] | https://www.metaculus.com/api2/questions/519/ | Not applicable/available for this question. | Science & Tech | The Carrington Event, the strongest solar storm on record, was no joke.
Shortly before Noon on September 1, 1859, amateur solar observers in England noticed an intense burst of light from a large sunspot group. Less than 20 hours later, a cloud of hot plasma ejected by the flare slammed into Earth's magnetosphere. Auroras were visible down to tropical latitudes, and telegraphs failed in spectacular fashion, reportedly delivering electric shocks to their operators. As discussed in a previous question, solar storms have the potential to impact power and communications systems, and storms at or above the Carrington level would have devastating effects. A 2013 assessment by Lloyd's estimates that if such an event were to occur today, damages to the US economy alone would range from 0.6 to 2.6 trillion dollars.
Solar flares occur in association with magnetic field reconnection near the Sun's surface, and are most frequent during the active period of the solar cycle. The occurrence rate of solar storm energies follows a relatively well-defined power-law distribution, and the Carrington event was estimated to have had energy ~ erg. The frequency of trans-Carrington storms, however, depends on how far the distribution extends, which is unknown.
Some constraint comes from geological records. Evidence from an overabundance of radioactive 14C detected in tree rings suggests the Sun might have produced a small "superflare" in AD 775 and again in AD 993, although alternate explanations for the anomalies are also viable.
Additional insight is gained by monitoring of the flares of nearby stars. Researchers using the LAMOST telescope have reported regular eruptions 10,000 times larger than the Carrington event on other stars. The team showed that these superflares are likely formed via the same mechanism as solar flares, and unexpectedly, they found ~10% of the superflaring stars have magnetic fields either comparable to or weaker than the Sun's, implicitly raising the possibility that our Sun could go amok with a massive flare.
Superflaring stars generally have short rotation periods (which generate higher levels of magnetic activity), but stars with rotation as slow as the Sun can apparently also produce superflares. A study published in Nature showed a total of 187 superflares on 23 solar-type stars (5600-6000 K, rotational period > 10 d) having energies in the erg range. A consideration of theoretical estimates in conjunction with the observations generated a published hypothesis that superflares of erg occur once in ~800 yr on our present Sun.
An analysis of Kepler photometry showed that superflares on solar-type stars (with rotational periods greater than 10 days) exhibit similar occurrence frequency distribution of those for solar flares. The analysis suggests, however, that all superflaring stars have starspot complexes substantially larger than those presently occurring during solar maxima.
A reasonable summary of the current evidence suggests that the Sun can produce flares up to ~1000x the strength of the Carrington event, but such flares would require sunspot activity at levels substantially larger than those seen in the historical record. Given the stakes, it would be nice to have a better handle on the odds.
By July 2018, will additional significant evidence emerge suggesting that our Sun experiences erg or larger flares on a time scale shorter than 1000 years?
Positive resolution requires a paper in the peer-reviewed literature by July 2018 in which a "most likely" or "fiducial" estimate of solar flares with energy erg exceeds 1 per 1000 years. In addition, in order to add a specious bit of flair to the question, positive resolution will also occur in the unlikely event that a flare with energy exceeding ergs occurs prior to July 2018. | true | 2018-01-20 | Will new evidence emerge for the frequency of solar superflares? | metaculus | 0 |
2017-08-22 | 2017-08-20 | [] | binary | [["2017-08-20", 0.86], ["2017-08-20", 0.805], ["2017-08-20", 0.805], ["2017-08-20", 0.79], ["2017-08-20", 0.782], ["2017-08-20", 0.817], ["2017-08-20", 0.786], ["2017-08-20", 0.786], ["2017-08-21", 0.808], ["2017-08-21", 0.817], ["2017-08-21", 0.817], ["2017-08-21", 0.817], ["2017-08-21", 0.82], ["2017-08-21", 0.828], ["2017-08-21", 0.825], ["2017-08-21", 0.809], ["2017-08-21", 0.809], ["2017-08-21", 0.813], ["2017-08-21", 0.819], ["2017-08-21", 0.815]] | https://www.metaculus.com/api2/questions/521/ | Not applicable/available for this question. | Environment & Energy | A popular (but frustratingly long-resolution) question on Metaculus asks whether the total solar eclipse of June 25, 2522 will occur. Current odds stand at 95%...
Of more immediate concern is not whether the eclipse of August 21, 2017 (which will cut right through the center of the country, in a swathe from Oregon to South Carolina) will occur, but whether the weather conditions at points along the path of totality will lead to clouded-out eclipses.
Grand Teton National Park is perhaps the most iconic location along the coast-to-coast track of totality. As of Saturday evening, August 19, 2017, the weather forecast for the park at the time of totality calls optimistically yet nerve-wrackingly for "mostly sunny".
At the Jackson Lake location of the famous photograph of The Great Daylight Fireball of 1972, will the eclipse be clearly visible during totality (1:36 PM MDT) on August 21? | true | 2017-08-21 | Clear skies during totality at the Grand Tetons? | metaculus | 1 |
2017-11-14 | 2017-08-20 | [] | binary | [["2017-08-21", 0.69], ["2017-08-22", 0.69], ["2017-08-22", 0.73], ["2017-08-22", 0.71], ["2017-08-22", 0.71], ["2017-08-22", 0.688], ["2017-08-22", 0.707], ["2017-08-22", 0.703], ["2017-08-22", 0.703], ["2017-08-22", 0.689], ["2017-08-23", 0.686], ["2017-08-23", 0.695], ["2017-08-23", 0.695], ["2017-08-23", 0.685], ["2017-08-24", 0.68], ["2017-08-26", 0.668], ["2017-08-27", 0.668], ["2017-08-27", 0.667], ["2017-08-27", 0.658], ["2017-08-28", 0.658], ["2017-08-31", 0.657], ["2017-09-01", 0.652], ["2017-09-02", 0.652], ["2017-09-02", 0.657], ["2017-09-02", 0.664], ["2017-09-03", 0.664], ["2017-09-03", 0.676], ["2017-09-03", 0.676], ["2017-09-03", 0.673], ["2017-09-04", 0.671], ["2017-09-04", 0.669], ["2017-09-05", 0.661], ["2017-09-05", 0.661], ["2017-09-05", 0.659], ["2017-09-06", 0.664], ["2017-09-11", 0.664], ["2017-09-21", 0.659], ["2017-09-24", 0.657], ["2017-09-30", 0.657], ["2017-10-01", 0.659], ["2017-10-01", 0.657], ["2017-10-04", 0.662], ["2017-10-04", 0.662], ["2017-10-04", 0.661], ["2017-10-04", 0.661], ["2017-10-06", 0.658], ["2017-10-07", 0.658], ["2017-10-07", 0.655], ["2017-10-14", 0.655], ["2017-10-14", 0.651], ["2017-10-14", 0.652], ["2017-10-14", 0.652], ["2017-10-14", 0.658], ["2017-10-14", 0.658], ["2017-10-14", 0.671], ["2017-10-14", 0.671], ["2017-10-15", 0.671]] | https://www.metaculus.com/api2/questions/522/ | Kinetic lethal autonomous offensive weapons systems (KLAOWS) are a potential new stage in global armaments and warfare, as well as a new potential weapon of mass destruction.
Many current weapons systems, such as military drones, are moving toward autonomy, and autonomous "swarms" of aircraft have been tested. Meanwhile non-military drone technology continues with highly capable drones potentially equipped with facial recognition (and potentially armable) and other narrow AI capabilities becoming cheaper and more effective.
There is significant concern about an arms race in these weapons developing. An open letter coordinated by the Future of Life Institute and signed by > 3000 AI/ML researchers and 17,000 others argues that
If any major military power pushes ahead with AI weapon development, a global arms race is virtually inevitable, and the endpoint of this technological trajectory is obvious: autonomous weapons will become the Kalashnikovs of tomorrow. Unlike nuclear weapons, they require no costly or hard-to-obtain raw materials, so they will become ubiquitous and cheap for all significant military powers to mass-produce. It will only be a matter of time until they appear on the black market and in the hands of terrorists, dictators wishing to better control their populace, warlords wishing to perpetrate ethnic cleansing, etc. Autonomous weapons are ideal for tasks such as assassinations, destabilizing nations, subduing populations and selectively killing a particular ethnic group.
International negotiations to potentially limit KLAOWS are underway but dragging. A formal UN discussions scheduled for late August were cancelled due to technicalities. On August 20, an open letter was released signed by a large number of robotics and AI company CEOs and others encouraging the UN to continue negotiations toward limiting use of KLAOWS.
A meeting is currently targeted for November 2017. | Security & Defense | Will a meeting of the Group of Governmental Experts (GGE) already established by the UN begin formal meetings at some point in November 2017?
Resolution is positive if formal discussions at the UN commence at some point prior to the end of November. | true | 2017-10-15 | Will the UN host a meeting in November to continue discussions regarding lethal autonomous weapons? | metaculus | 1 |
2018-09-01 | 2017-08-24 | [] | binary | [["2017-08-25", 0.42], ["2017-08-25", 0.374], ["2017-08-25", 0.33], ["2017-08-25", 0.322], ["2017-08-25", 0.322], ["2017-08-25", 0.352], ["2017-08-26", 0.298], ["2017-08-26", 0.286], ["2017-08-26", 0.283], ["2017-08-27", 0.262], ["2017-08-27", 0.262], ["2017-08-27", 0.258], ["2017-08-27", 0.25], ["2017-08-27", 0.255], ["2017-08-27", 0.237], ["2017-08-28", 0.24], ["2017-08-28", 0.236], ["2017-08-28", 0.239], ["2017-08-29", 0.227], ["2017-08-29", 0.227], ["2017-08-29", 0.222], ["2017-08-30", 0.213], ["2017-08-30", 0.21], ["2017-08-31", 0.215], ["2017-08-31", 0.223], ["2017-08-31", 0.223], ["2017-08-31", 0.217], ["2017-09-01", 0.22], ["2017-09-01", 0.219], ["2017-09-03", 0.219], ["2017-09-04", 0.223], ["2017-09-05", 0.223], ["2017-09-06", 0.225], ["2017-09-07", 0.229], ["2017-09-07", 0.233], ["2017-09-08", 0.24], ["2017-09-08", 0.239], ["2017-09-08", 0.24], ["2017-09-10", 0.235], ["2017-09-12", 0.234], ["2017-09-21", 0.234], ["2017-09-24", 0.235], ["2017-09-24", 0.235], ["2017-09-26", 0.238], ["2017-09-28", 0.238], ["2017-09-29", 0.239], ["2017-09-30", 0.241], ["2017-10-01", 0.241], ["2017-10-07", 0.243], ["2017-10-07", 0.247], ["2017-10-11", 0.247], ["2017-10-14", 0.258], ["2017-10-15", 0.258], ["2017-10-15", 0.258], ["2017-10-18", 0.258], ["2017-10-23", 0.26], ["2017-10-30", 0.262], ["2017-11-01", 0.262], ["2017-11-05", 0.262], ["2017-11-05", 0.263], ["2017-11-06", 0.262], ["2017-11-07", 0.262], ["2017-11-07", 0.262], ["2017-11-07", 0.262], ["2017-11-08", 0.262], ["2017-11-08", 0.262], ["2017-11-09", 0.26], ["2017-11-15", 0.26], ["2017-11-15", 0.26], ["2017-11-17", 0.257], ["2017-11-18", 0.256], ["2017-11-18", 0.258], ["2017-11-18", 0.26], ["2017-11-19", 0.262], ["2017-11-20", 0.26], ["2017-11-20", 0.259], ["2017-11-20", 0.258], ["2017-11-21", 0.256], ["2017-11-24", 0.255], ["2017-11-25", 0.255], ["2017-11-28", 0.255], ["2017-11-29", 0.255], ["2017-11-30", 0.257], ["2017-12-01", 0.254], ["2017-12-01", 0.255], ["2017-12-01", 0.255], ["2017-12-01", 0.251], ["2017-12-01", 0.246], ["2017-12-02", 0.246], ["2017-12-02", 0.245], ["2017-12-03", 0.245], ["2017-12-03", 0.243], ["2017-12-03", 0.244], ["2017-12-04", 0.243], ["2017-12-05", 0.242], ["2017-12-10", 0.241], ["2017-12-13", 0.241], ["2017-12-13", 0.242], ["2017-12-13", 0.243], ["2017-12-13", 0.242], ["2017-12-14", 0.242]] | https://www.metaculus.com/api2/questions/524/ | Not applicable/available for this question. | Economics & Business | As detailed in this collection, Elon musk has a lot going on. In addition to being CEO of Tesla, he:
Is CEO of SpaceX;
Heads the "Boring company" digging tunnels for traffic and/or Hyperloop;
Provides some level of indirect support to Hyperloop;
Co-founded and oversees "Neuralink," an effort toward direct brain interfaces;
Involved in AI through OpenAI (as cofounder) and other initiatives (e.g. funding Future of Life Institute);
Plays some role in SolarCity (now owned by Tesla).
This must be very tiring. Back in 2013, Musk said that he would remain with Tesla through the successful launch of the model 3. This is now (largely) done, with Tesla's primary problem being producing enough vehicles to meet demand. An engineer at heart, will Musk really stay interested enough in building Tesla out as a car company to remain CEO?
SpaceX, on the other hand, is in much more flux, with a number of projects appearing and disappearing regularly. Less time at Tesla could allow him a lot more focus on SpaceX and other endeavors that might be more fun than ramping up production facilities. So we'll ask:
Will Elon Musk step down as CEO by Tesla prior to Sept. 1, 2018?
Resolution is by credible media report. | true | 2017-12-15 | Will Elon Musk step down as CEO of Tesla by mid-2018? | metaculus | 0 |
2017-10-17 | 2017-08-25 | [] | binary | [["2017-08-26", 0.89], ["2017-08-26", 0.89], ["2017-08-26", 0.883], ["2017-08-26", 0.883], ["2017-08-26", 0.888], ["2017-08-26", 0.873], ["2017-08-26", 0.858], ["2017-08-26", 0.838], ["2017-08-26", 0.838], ["2017-08-27", 0.841], ["2017-08-27", 0.837], ["2017-08-27", 0.837], ["2017-08-27", 0.838], ["2017-08-27", 0.851], ["2017-08-27", 0.834], ["2017-08-27", 0.831], ["2017-08-28", 0.824], ["2017-08-28", 0.809], ["2017-08-28", 0.808], ["2017-08-28", 0.808], ["2017-08-29", 0.799], ["2017-08-29", 0.799], ["2017-08-29", 0.793], ["2017-08-29", 0.806], ["2017-08-30", 0.811], ["2017-08-30", 0.811], ["2017-08-30", 0.815], ["2017-08-30", 0.808], ["2017-08-31", 0.801], ["2017-09-01", 0.801], ["2017-09-01", 0.786], ["2017-09-01", 0.786], ["2017-09-01", 0.78], ["2017-09-01", 0.78], ["2017-09-01", 0.786], ["2017-09-01", 0.786], ["2017-09-01", 0.79], ["2017-09-01", 0.788], ["2017-09-03", 0.79], ["2017-09-03", 0.788], ["2017-09-03", 0.788], ["2017-09-04", 0.79], ["2017-09-04", 0.79], ["2017-09-05", 0.786], ["2017-09-06", 0.784], ["2017-09-07", 0.784], ["2017-09-07", 0.787], ["2017-09-07", 0.782], ["2017-09-13", 0.782], ["2017-09-14", 0.793], ["2017-09-20", 0.794], ["2017-09-20", 0.796], ["2017-09-22", 0.793], ["2017-09-22", 0.795], ["2017-09-22", 0.795], ["2017-09-22", 0.792], ["2017-09-23", 0.793], ["2017-09-23", 0.793], ["2017-09-24", 0.787], ["2017-09-24", 0.787], ["2017-09-25", 0.787], ["2017-09-26", 0.784], ["2017-09-26", 0.78], ["2017-09-26", 0.78], ["2017-09-26", 0.783], ["2017-09-26", 0.782], ["2017-09-27", 0.782], ["2017-09-27", 0.781], ["2017-09-27", 0.781], ["2017-09-27", 0.778], ["2017-09-27", 0.778], ["2017-09-27", 0.784], ["2017-09-27", 0.785], ["2017-09-27", 0.791], ["2017-09-27", 0.788], ["2017-09-27", 0.788], ["2017-09-27", 0.782], ["2017-09-28", 0.775], ["2017-09-28", 0.775], ["2017-09-28", 0.775], ["2017-09-28", 0.761], ["2017-09-28", 0.772], ["2017-09-28", 0.775], ["2017-09-28", 0.762], ["2017-09-28", 0.759], ["2017-09-30", 0.759], ["2017-09-30", 0.759], ["2017-09-30", 0.756], ["2017-09-30", 0.756], ["2017-09-30", 0.756], ["2017-10-01", 0.752], ["2017-10-01", 0.749]] | https://www.metaculus.com/api2/questions/525/ | Not applicable/available for this question. | Science & Tech | Twitter is not necessarily the first-choice medium for publishing scientific results, but sometimes rumors turn out to be true. On August 18th, J. Craig Wheeler of UT Austin tweeted: "New LIGO. Source with optical counterpart. Blow your sox off." Peter Yoachim at the University of Washington followed with tweets suggesting that the responsible party was a pair of neutron stars in the 40 Mpc-distant, and otherwise highly obscure galaxy NGC 4993.
As detailed in this Nature News article, numerous major telescopes, including HST and Chandra have recently been pointed at NGC 4993. The rumored gravitational wave event, furthermore, may be associated with the short gamma ray burst event SGRB 170817A.
Will a paper authored (or co-authored) by the LIGO Collaboration appear in a peer-reviewed journal prior to February 1, 2018 announcing with high confidence the detection of a neutron star merger in NGC 4993? | true | 2017-10-01 | LIGO announcement of a neutron star merger in NGC 4993? | metaculus | 1 |
2017-10-06 | 2017-08-27 | [] | binary | [["2017-08-28", 0.25], ["2017-08-28", 0.1], ["2017-08-28", 0.1], ["2017-08-28", 0.15], ["2017-08-28", 0.15], ["2017-08-28", 0.237], ["2017-08-28", 0.425], ["2017-08-28", 0.425], ["2017-08-28", 0.405], ["2017-08-28", 0.383], ["2017-08-28", 0.267], ["2017-08-28", 0.259], ["2017-08-28", 0.258], ["2017-08-28", 0.258], ["2017-08-28", 0.25], ["2017-08-28", 0.24], ["2017-08-28", 0.233], ["2017-08-29", 0.233], ["2017-08-29", 0.234], ["2017-08-29", 0.234], ["2017-08-29", 0.271], ["2017-08-29", 0.291], ["2017-08-30", 0.291], ["2017-08-30", 0.292], ["2017-08-30", 0.308], ["2017-08-30", 0.314], ["2017-08-30", 0.288], ["2017-08-30", 0.288], ["2017-08-30", 0.28], ["2017-08-30", 0.28], ["2017-08-30", 0.278], ["2017-08-30", 0.289], ["2017-08-31", 0.289], ["2017-08-31", 0.3], ["2017-09-01", 0.3], ["2017-09-01", 0.3], ["2017-09-01", 0.299], ["2017-09-02", 0.297], ["2017-09-03", 0.297], ["2017-09-03", 0.297], ["2017-09-03", 0.287], ["2017-09-03", 0.284], ["2017-09-04", 0.29], ["2017-09-04", 0.29], ["2017-09-05", 0.279], ["2017-09-06", 0.276], ["2017-09-06", 0.267], ["2017-09-07", 0.267], ["2017-09-07", 0.265], ["2017-09-07", 0.265], ["2017-09-08", 0.263], ["2017-09-08", 0.273], ["2017-09-09", 0.268], ["2017-09-10", 0.268], ["2017-09-11", 0.263], ["2017-09-11", 0.247], ["2017-09-11", 0.244], ["2017-09-12", 0.239], ["2017-09-12", 0.241], ["2017-09-12", 0.24]] | https://www.metaculus.com/api2/questions/527/ | Not applicable/available for this question. | Arts & Recreation | Pokemon Go was the first highly-successful augmented reality (AR) game, being downloaded more than 500 millions times. But it will surely not be the last.
In the near future is a "Last Jedi" AR game launching Sept. 1 2017. Unlike Pokemon Go, this game is largely marketing for the upcoming film, and the app has to be taken to participating stores, not random locations worldwide.
Will this effort be a success or a flop?
Question resolves positive if between Sept. 16 and Oct. 1 2017, the official Last Jedi App appears in one of the top 5 slots in in the iOS top charts ("Paid", "Free", or "Top grossing.") | true | 2017-09-12 | Will the upcoming "Last Jedi" augmented reality game be a success? | metaculus | 0 |
2020-07-04 | 2017-08-27 | [] | binary | [["2017-08-29", 0.33], ["2017-08-29", 0.266], ["2017-08-29", 0.215], ["2017-08-31", 0.234], ["2017-09-01", 0.218], ["2017-09-02", 0.216], ["2017-09-03", 0.205], ["2017-09-03", 0.194], ["2017-09-04", 0.194], ["2017-09-04", 0.186], ["2017-09-05", 0.196], ["2017-09-06", 0.196], ["2017-09-06", 0.201], ["2017-09-14", 0.207], ["2017-09-14", 0.207], ["2017-09-15", 0.198], ["2017-09-24", 0.207], ["2017-10-01", 0.214], ["2017-10-07", 0.214], ["2017-10-08", 0.2], ["2017-10-17", 0.194], ["2017-10-18", 0.197], ["2017-10-19", 0.197], ["2017-10-19", 0.204], ["2017-10-20", 0.208], ["2017-10-21", 0.206], ["2017-10-23", 0.206], ["2017-10-28", 0.211], ["2017-10-31", 0.208], ["2017-11-19", 0.209], ["2017-12-22", 0.209], ["2018-01-04", 0.217], ["2018-01-09", 0.224], ["2018-01-14", 0.224], ["2018-02-11", 0.222], ["2018-02-14", 0.22], ["2018-02-16", 0.216], ["2018-02-17", 0.219], ["2018-02-18", 0.216], ["2018-02-21", 0.212], ["2018-03-15", 0.219], ["2018-03-15", 0.219], ["2018-03-19", 0.219], ["2018-04-02", 0.219], ["2018-04-05", 0.219], ["2018-04-05", 0.222], ["2018-04-09", 0.227], ["2018-04-15", 0.228], ["2018-04-17", 0.223], ["2018-04-19", 0.223], ["2018-04-23", 0.222], ["2018-05-03", 0.226], ["2018-05-09", 0.226], ["2018-05-14", 0.226], ["2018-05-30", 0.228], ["2018-06-02", 0.229], ["2018-06-06", 0.229], ["2018-06-06", 0.235], ["2018-06-11", 0.237], ["2018-06-12", 0.237], ["2018-06-12", 0.239], ["2018-07-01", 0.242], ["2018-07-12", 0.242], ["2018-08-02", 0.245], ["2018-08-03", 0.244], ["2018-08-07", 0.242], ["2018-08-07", 0.241], ["2018-08-08", 0.244], ["2018-08-10", 0.254], ["2018-08-10", 0.254], ["2018-08-17", 0.255], ["2018-08-24", 0.25], ["2018-08-25", 0.25], ["2018-09-09", 0.25], ["2018-09-09", 0.251], ["2018-09-12", 0.253], ["2018-09-12", 0.252], ["2018-09-17", 0.252], ["2018-09-18", 0.254], ["2018-09-19", 0.254], ["2018-09-26", 0.255], ["2018-10-06", 0.255], ["2018-10-10", 0.256], ["2018-10-27", 0.255], ["2018-10-31", 0.255], ["2018-10-31", 0.26], ["2018-11-11", 0.264], ["2018-11-12", 0.264], ["2018-11-13", 0.263], ["2018-11-23", 0.267], ["2018-11-23", 0.272], ["2018-12-13", 0.272], ["2018-12-13", 0.268], ["2018-12-17", 0.269], ["2018-12-18", 0.269], ["2018-12-25", 0.269], ["2018-12-27", 0.27], ["2018-12-27", 0.27], ["2018-12-30", 0.269], ["2018-12-31", 0.271], ["2018-12-31", 0.27]] | https://www.metaculus.com/api2/questions/528/ | Not applicable/available for this question. | Science & Tech | Cold fusion of the late 1980's Fleischmann-Pons variety has long since fallen into disrepute, but it is interesting to recall that the coinage of the term actually dates to a 1956 New York Times article describing the phenomenon of muon-catalyzed fusion.
In a nutshell, a muon replaces one of the electrons in a hydrogen molecule (generally of the exotic deuterium-tritium variety), allowing the two nuclei to draw far closer than the normal covalent bond would allow. With proximity thus achieved, the probaility of deuterium-tritium fusion is greatly increased. After a fusion reaction occurs, the responsible muon is free to catalyze further events until it either decays (its rest frame half-life is two microseconds) or is removed from action by "sticking" to an alpha particle produced by the fusion. Economic viability of the process for creating energy would require that a single muon catalyze approximately 500 fusion events before it decays, a rate of efficiency that exceeds best efforts by at least a factor of two or three.
Muon-catalyzed fusion was originally observed in laboratory experiments and described in this article by Luis Alvarez et al., and was studied in depth by John David Jackson, he of Jackson's Electrodynamics fame. Jackson's 1957 Physical Review article is a standard reference, and remarkably, more than a half-century later, he summarized the history of the field in this 2010 review.
The prospects for muon-catalyzed fusion as an energy source seemed moderately bright during the 1980s and 1990s, following the elucidation and observation of molecular states of the deuterium-tritium-muon positive ion. The field has largely stalled in recent years, however, as workable schemes for either producing muons more cheaply, or improving their catalytic efficiency have failed to emerge.
At the close of the 2010 article, Jackson seemed optimistic, writing, "The effort for such a specialized field has been prodigious, especially in the last 30 years. On the applied side, ideas continue on how to increase the number of fusions per muon and design hybrid systems to get into the realm of net energy production." Certainly, it is fair to state that development of effective muon-catalyzed fusion for energy production would be a global game changer.
Prior to Jan 1, 2020, will a peer-reviewed article appear in the mainstream physics literature which discusses a discovery of a physical phenomenon or which outlines an engineering technique that can either (1) increase the number of deuterium-tritium fusions per muon, or (2) decrease the energy cost of muon production to the point where a break-even reactor is feasible? | true | 2019-01-01 | A revival of interest in muon-catalyzed fusion? | metaculus | 1 |
2017-11-12 | 2017-08-29 | [] | binary | [["2017-09-15", 0.95], ["2017-09-15", 0.96], ["2017-09-15", 0.965], ["2017-09-15", 0.958], ["2017-09-15", 0.958], ["2017-09-15", 0.948], ["2017-09-15", 0.949], ["2017-09-15", 0.954], ["2017-09-15", 0.954], ["2017-09-15", 0.954], ["2017-09-16", 0.958], ["2017-09-16", 0.961], ["2017-09-16", 0.969], ["2017-09-16", 0.969], ["2017-09-16", 0.962], ["2017-09-16", 0.964], ["2017-09-16", 0.964], ["2017-09-16", 0.967], ["2017-09-17", 0.969], ["2017-09-19", 0.969], ["2017-09-19", 0.944], ["2017-09-19", 0.944], ["2017-09-19", 0.943], ["2017-09-19", 0.943], ["2017-09-19", 0.943], ["2017-09-20", 0.943], ["2017-09-20", 0.931], ["2017-09-20", 0.931], ["2017-09-20", 0.934], ["2017-09-20", 0.928], ["2017-09-21", 0.929], ["2017-09-21", 0.929], ["2017-09-21", 0.929], ["2017-09-21", 0.929], ["2017-09-21", 0.929], ["2017-09-21", 0.931], ["2017-09-21", 0.931], ["2017-09-21", 0.928], ["2017-09-21", 0.928], ["2017-09-21", 0.929], ["2017-09-21", 0.929], ["2017-09-22", 0.929], ["2017-09-22", 0.93], ["2017-09-22", 0.931], ["2017-09-22", 0.931], ["2017-09-23", 0.927], ["2017-09-23", 0.927], ["2017-09-23", 0.928], ["2017-09-23", 0.93], ["2017-09-23", 0.93], ["2017-09-23", 0.93], ["2017-09-23", 0.932], ["2017-09-24", 0.932], ["2017-09-24", 0.932], ["2017-09-24", 0.931], ["2017-09-24", 0.932], ["2017-09-24", 0.93], ["2017-09-25", 0.93], ["2017-09-26", 0.932], ["2017-09-27", 0.933], ["2017-09-29", 0.933], ["2017-09-30", 0.928], ["2017-09-30", 0.928], ["2017-10-01", 0.93], ["2017-10-02", 0.931], ["2017-10-05", 0.932], ["2017-10-05", 0.932], ["2017-10-06", 0.932], ["2017-10-10", 0.934], ["2017-10-10", 0.934], ["2017-10-10", 0.934], ["2017-10-10", 0.934], ["2017-10-11", 0.935], ["2017-10-13", 0.936], ["2017-10-14", 0.936], ["2017-10-17", 0.937], ["2017-10-17", 0.937], ["2017-10-17", 0.939], ["2017-10-17", 0.939], ["2017-10-19", 0.94], ["2017-10-19", 0.94], ["2017-10-19", 0.941], ["2017-10-20", 0.939], ["2017-10-20", 0.94], ["2017-10-21", 0.94], ["2017-10-21", 0.94], ["2017-10-23", 0.936], ["2017-10-23", 0.937], ["2017-10-23", 0.937], ["2017-10-24", 0.937], ["2017-10-24", 0.937], ["2017-10-26", 0.935], ["2017-10-26", 0.935], ["2017-10-26", 0.935], ["2017-10-26", 0.936], ["2017-10-28", 0.936], ["2017-10-29", 0.934], ["2017-10-29", 0.931], ["2017-10-31", 0.931], ["2017-10-31", 0.931], ["2017-10-31", 0.931]] | https://www.metaculus.com/api2/questions/529/ | Not applicable/available for this question. | Economics & Business | As of question launch, the top two cryptocurrencies by market capitalization are Bitcoin and Ethereum (by a significant margin) according to coinmarketcap.com.
This question resolves negative if on Dec. 1 the one-month plot of coin market capitalization plot here covering the month of November shows any currency other than Ethereum or Bitcoin crossing the Ethereum or Bitcoin capitalization curve. It resolves positively otherwise. | true | 2017-11-01 | Will Bitcoin and Ethereum be the two highest market-cap cryptocurrencies for all of November 2017? | metaculus | 0 |
2017-12-01 | 2017-08-30 | [] | binary | [["2017-09-15", 0.85], ["2017-09-15", 0.85], ["2017-09-15", 0.74], ["2017-09-15", 0.697], ["2017-09-15", 0.664], ["2017-09-15", 0.703], ["2017-09-15", 0.715], ["2017-09-15", 0.684], ["2017-09-15", 0.67], ["2017-09-15", 0.686], ["2017-09-15", 0.707], ["2017-09-16", 0.702], ["2017-09-16", 0.702], ["2017-09-16", 0.717], ["2017-09-19", 0.703], ["2017-09-19", 0.703], ["2017-09-20", 0.706], ["2017-09-20", 0.673], ["2017-09-21", 0.672], ["2017-09-23", 0.672], ["2017-09-23", 0.662], ["2017-09-24", 0.637], ["2017-09-28", 0.637], ["2017-09-28", 0.633], ["2017-09-30", 0.629], ["2017-10-01", 0.626], ["2017-10-01", 0.632], ["2017-10-02", 0.613], ["2017-10-04", 0.608], ["2017-10-04", 0.587], ["2017-10-05", 0.586], ["2017-10-06", 0.58], ["2017-10-09", 0.579], ["2017-10-11", 0.579], ["2017-10-12", 0.573], ["2017-10-13", 0.571], ["2017-10-13", 0.567], ["2017-10-14", 0.567], ["2017-10-15", 0.558], ["2017-10-15", 0.553], ["2017-10-15", 0.553], ["2017-10-17", 0.551], ["2017-10-17", 0.548], ["2017-10-18", 0.559], ["2017-10-18", 0.559], ["2017-10-18", 0.558], ["2017-10-18", 0.552], ["2017-10-19", 0.547], ["2017-10-19", 0.541], ["2017-10-20", 0.536], ["2017-10-21", 0.536], ["2017-10-21", 0.528], ["2017-10-21", 0.524], ["2017-10-21", 0.524], ["2017-10-21", 0.524], ["2017-10-22", 0.521], ["2017-10-22", 0.522], ["2017-10-22", 0.518], ["2017-10-22", 0.513], ["2017-10-22", 0.512], ["2017-10-22", 0.512], ["2017-10-22", 0.51], ["2017-10-23", 0.51], ["2017-10-23", 0.509], ["2017-10-23", 0.512], ["2017-10-23", 0.509], ["2017-10-24", 0.503], ["2017-10-24", 0.5], ["2017-10-24", 0.5], ["2017-10-24", 0.5], ["2017-10-24", 0.5], ["2017-10-25", 0.503], ["2017-10-25", 0.5], ["2017-10-25", 0.5], ["2017-10-25", 0.5]] | https://www.metaculus.com/api2/questions/533/ | Not applicable/available for this question. | Security & Defense | The SEC has recently stepped in to the cryptocurrency and particularly Initial Coin offering (ICO) space with several public statements and two "alerts" issued on July 25 and August 28 regarding these offerings.
Will one or more additional SEC alerts be issued during November 2017?
Resolution is positive if the above-linked search shows one or more alerts issued between Nov. 1, 2017 and Nov. 30, 2017, inclusive, and negative otherwise. | true | 2017-10-25 | Another ICO-related SEC alert published in November 2017? | metaculus | 0 |
2017-12-01 | 2017-08-31 | [] | binary | [["2017-09-15", 0.35], ["2017-09-15", 0.253], ["2017-09-15", 0.245], ["2017-09-15", 0.288], ["2017-09-15", 0.25], ["2017-09-15", 0.25], ["2017-09-15", 0.214], ["2017-09-15", 0.214], ["2017-09-16", 0.234], ["2017-09-16", 0.234], ["2017-09-16", 0.226], ["2017-09-16", 0.226], ["2017-09-16", 0.249], ["2017-09-16", 0.233], ["2017-09-16", 0.238], ["2017-09-16", 0.238], ["2017-09-17", 0.223], ["2017-09-17", 0.204], ["2017-09-18", 0.204], ["2017-09-19", 0.206], ["2017-09-19", 0.235], ["2017-09-20", 0.239], ["2017-09-20", 0.234], ["2017-09-20", 0.238], ["2017-09-20", 0.238], ["2017-09-20", 0.227], ["2017-09-20", 0.227], ["2017-09-21", 0.212], ["2017-09-21", 0.212], ["2017-09-21", 0.205], ["2017-09-21", 0.205], ["2017-09-22", 0.201], ["2017-09-23", 0.201], ["2017-09-23", 0.201], ["2017-09-24", 0.201], ["2017-09-24", 0.196], ["2017-09-25", 0.193], ["2017-09-29", 0.193], ["2017-09-29", 0.196], ["2017-09-30", 0.196], ["2017-09-30", 0.202], ["2017-09-30", 0.2], ["2017-10-01", 0.2], ["2017-10-02", 0.197], ["2017-10-02", 0.193], ["2017-10-02", 0.193], ["2017-10-02", 0.191], ["2017-10-03", 0.191], ["2017-10-03", 0.191], ["2017-10-07", 0.189], ["2017-10-07", 0.187], ["2017-10-07", 0.187], ["2017-10-07", 0.187], ["2017-10-07", 0.188], ["2017-10-08", 0.19], ["2017-10-08", 0.19], ["2017-10-09", 0.188], ["2017-10-09", 0.186], ["2017-10-09", 0.186], ["2017-10-10", 0.189], ["2017-10-11", 0.19], ["2017-10-11", 0.19], ["2017-10-11", 0.19], ["2017-10-12", 0.189], ["2017-10-12", 0.189], ["2017-10-13", 0.187], ["2017-10-13", 0.186], ["2017-10-14", 0.185], ["2017-10-15", 0.182], ["2017-10-15", 0.182], ["2017-10-15", 0.182], ["2017-10-15", 0.184], ["2017-10-16", 0.182], ["2017-10-16", 0.181], ["2017-10-17", 0.181], ["2017-10-17", 0.175], ["2017-10-17", 0.172], ["2017-10-17", 0.171], ["2017-10-17", 0.169], ["2017-10-17", 0.167], ["2017-10-17", 0.165], ["2017-10-17", 0.166], ["2017-10-17", 0.168], ["2017-10-17", 0.168], ["2017-10-18", 0.167], ["2017-10-19", 0.167], ["2017-10-19", 0.168], ["2017-10-19", 0.168], ["2017-10-19", 0.172], ["2017-10-19", 0.172], ["2017-10-19", 0.18], ["2017-10-19", 0.182], ["2017-10-19", 0.182], ["2017-10-19", 0.181], ["2017-10-19", 0.181], ["2017-10-19", 0.18], ["2017-10-19", 0.179], ["2017-10-19", 0.181], ["2017-10-20", 0.181], ["2017-10-20", 0.183]] | https://www.metaculus.com/api2/questions/534/ | Not applicable/available for this question. | Economics & Business | As of question launch, ETH is at less than 50% of Bitcoin's market cap, after coming as close as 80% in mid-June.
Will ETH be above 75% of BTC's market value at some point between Nov. 1 and Nov. 30, inclusive?
Resolution is positive if the chart at coinmarketcap shows the ratio of ETH/BTC market share to bet greater than 0.75 between Nov. 1 and Nov. 30. (Crossing this threshold prior to Nov. 1 does not count toward positive resolution). | true | 2017-10-20 | Will Ethereum hit 75% of Bitcoin's market cap during November 2017? | metaculus | 0 |
2017-11-20 | 2017-08-31 | [] | binary | [["2017-09-15", 0.9], ["2017-09-15", 0.843], ["2017-09-15", 0.757], ["2017-09-15", 0.807], ["2017-09-15", 0.807], ["2017-09-15", 0.778], ["2017-09-15", 0.748], ["2017-09-15", 0.77], ["2017-09-15", 0.736], ["2017-09-15", 0.699], ["2017-09-15", 0.699], ["2017-09-15", 0.644], ["2017-09-15", 0.642], ["2017-09-15", 0.642], ["2017-09-15", 0.615], ["2017-09-15", 0.539], ["2017-09-15", 0.532], ["2017-09-15", 0.528], ["2017-09-15", 0.524], ["2017-09-15", 0.52], ["2017-09-15", 0.52], ["2017-09-15", 0.52], ["2017-09-15", 0.52], ["2017-09-16", 0.471], ["2017-09-16", 0.457], ["2017-09-16", 0.407], ["2017-09-16", 0.439], ["2017-09-16", 0.386], ["2017-09-16", 0.386], ["2017-09-16", 0.39], ["2017-09-16", 0.392], ["2017-09-16", 0.393], ["2017-09-16", 0.393], ["2017-09-16", 0.396], ["2017-09-16", 0.387], ["2017-09-16", 0.387], ["2017-09-17", 0.376], ["2017-09-17", 0.376], ["2017-09-17", 0.362], ["2017-09-17", 0.361], ["2017-09-17", 0.361], ["2017-09-17", 0.36], ["2017-09-17", 0.345], ["2017-09-18", 0.343], ["2017-09-18", 0.343], ["2017-09-19", 0.347], ["2017-09-19", 0.338], ["2017-09-19", 0.337], ["2017-09-19", 0.339], ["2017-09-19", 0.337], ["2017-09-19", 0.328], ["2017-09-19", 0.328], ["2017-09-20", 0.321], ["2017-09-20", 0.326], ["2017-09-20", 0.326], ["2017-09-20", 0.326], ["2017-09-20", 0.315], ["2017-09-20", 0.294], ["2017-09-20", 0.306], ["2017-09-21", 0.33], ["2017-09-21", 0.33], ["2017-09-21", 0.332], ["2017-09-21", 0.332], ["2017-09-22", 0.332], ["2017-09-22", 0.333], ["2017-09-22", 0.333], ["2017-09-22", 0.333], ["2017-09-23", 0.327], ["2017-09-23", 0.327], ["2017-09-24", 0.332], ["2017-09-24", 0.333], ["2017-09-25", 0.337], ["2017-09-25", 0.335], ["2017-09-26", 0.337], ["2017-09-26", 0.333], ["2017-09-26", 0.336], ["2017-09-27", 0.333], ["2017-09-27", 0.33], ["2017-09-27", 0.33], ["2017-09-27", 0.329], ["2017-09-27", 0.328], ["2017-09-27", 0.326], ["2017-09-27", 0.326], ["2017-09-27", 0.331], ["2017-09-27", 0.327], ["2017-09-28", 0.327], ["2017-09-28", 0.324], ["2017-09-29", 0.324], ["2017-09-29", 0.318], ["2017-09-29", 0.317], ["2017-09-30", 0.317], ["2017-09-30", 0.315], ["2017-09-30", 0.318], ["2017-09-30", 0.32], ["2017-09-30", 0.32], ["2017-09-30", 0.318], ["2017-09-30", 0.315], ["2017-09-30", 0.315], ["2017-10-01", 0.317]] | https://www.metaculus.com/api2/questions/536/ | Not applicable/available for this question. | Economics & Business | The general crytocurrency market has been on a roll for quite a while, as exhibited for example by Smith & Crown's capitalization-weighted index. But of late (in early September) there have been some signs of a selloff.
Will the overall upward movement continue for the next several months or are we due for a downturn?
Question resolves positive if the Smith & Crown index on November 15, 2017 is lower than the index on September 15, 2017, and negative otherwise.
Resolves ambiguous if the index methodology changes in some way that leads to a discontinuous change in the index of more than 0.1%. | true | 2017-10-01 | A downturn in the cryptocurrency market as a whole? | metaculus | 0 |
2017-12-05 | 2017-08-31 | [] | binary | [["2017-09-15", 0.11], ["2017-09-15", 0.11], ["2017-09-15", 0.227], ["2017-09-15", 0.214], ["2017-09-15", 0.166], ["2017-09-16", 0.228], ["2017-09-16", 0.246], ["2017-09-16", 0.246], ["2017-09-16", 0.219], ["2017-09-16", 0.237], ["2017-09-16", 0.229], ["2017-09-16", 0.179], ["2017-09-16", 0.204], ["2017-09-17", 0.206], ["2017-09-17", 0.206], ["2017-09-17", 0.205], ["2017-09-17", 0.205], ["2017-09-18", 0.224], ["2017-09-18", 0.224], ["2017-09-19", 0.243], ["2017-09-19", 0.243], ["2017-09-19", 0.24], ["2017-09-19", 0.236], ["2017-09-20", 0.234], ["2017-09-20", 0.257], ["2017-09-20", 0.259], ["2017-09-20", 0.26], ["2017-09-20", 0.26], ["2017-09-21", 0.254], ["2017-09-21", 0.298], ["2017-09-21", 0.313], ["2017-09-21", 0.313], ["2017-09-21", 0.328], ["2017-09-21", 0.33], ["2017-09-21", 0.33], ["2017-09-21", 0.337], ["2017-09-22", 0.337], ["2017-09-22", 0.341], ["2017-09-22", 0.337], ["2017-09-23", 0.337], ["2017-09-23", 0.345], ["2017-09-23", 0.342], ["2017-09-23", 0.332], ["2017-09-23", 0.332], ["2017-09-24", 0.33], ["2017-09-24", 0.343], ["2017-09-24", 0.378], ["2017-09-25", 0.38], ["2017-09-25", 0.38], ["2017-09-25", 0.39], ["2017-09-25", 0.384], ["2017-09-25", 0.384], ["2017-09-26", 0.379], ["2017-09-26", 0.384], ["2017-09-26", 0.384], ["2017-09-27", 0.384], ["2017-09-27", 0.384], ["2017-09-27", 0.385], ["2017-09-27", 0.403], ["2017-09-28", 0.413], ["2017-09-29", 0.413], ["2017-09-29", 0.423], ["2017-09-29", 0.423], ["2017-09-29", 0.441], ["2017-09-29", 0.456], ["2017-09-30", 0.457], ["2017-09-30", 0.457], ["2017-09-30", 0.457], ["2017-10-01", 0.455], ["2017-10-02", 0.461], ["2017-10-02", 0.464], ["2017-10-02", 0.464], ["2017-10-04", 0.453], ["2017-10-06", 0.453], ["2017-10-06", 0.458], ["2017-10-07", 0.458], ["2017-10-07", 0.459], ["2017-10-07", 0.467], ["2017-10-08", 0.467], ["2017-10-08", 0.474], ["2017-10-08", 0.481], ["2017-10-08", 0.487], ["2017-10-09", 0.487], ["2017-10-09", 0.486], ["2017-10-10", 0.488], ["2017-10-10", 0.489], ["2017-10-11", 0.491], ["2017-10-11", 0.489], ["2017-10-11", 0.495], ["2017-10-12", 0.495], ["2017-10-12", 0.497], ["2017-10-13", 0.491], ["2017-10-14", 0.491], ["2017-10-14", 0.5], ["2017-10-14", 0.505], ["2017-10-14", 0.503], ["2017-10-14", 0.507], ["2017-10-14", 0.507], ["2017-10-14", 0.507], ["2017-10-15", 0.506], ["2017-10-15", 0.5]] | https://www.metaculus.com/api2/questions/537/ | Not applicable/available for this question. | Economics & Business | In the relatively short history of cryptocurrencies there have been two major "splits": Ethereum into Ethereum and Ethereum Classic, and Bitcoin into Bitcoin and Bitcoin Cash.
With there be another major split in November 2017?
Resolution is positive if between Nov. 1 and Nov. 30 inclusive, a split of any of the following cryptocurrencies occurs:
Bitcoin, Ethereum, Bitcoin Cash, Ripple, Litecoin, NEM, Dash, Iota or Monera.
The fork will count as "major" if the new currency has a total market cap of > 1% of the original currency as of 12/1/17.
(Edited 9/15/17 to add criterion for "major.") | true | 2017-10-15 | Another significant cryptocurrency split during November 2017? | metaculus | 1 |
2017-11-16 | 2017-08-31 | [] | binary | [["2017-09-15", 0.99], ["2017-09-15", 0.712], ["2017-09-16", 0.733], ["2017-09-16", 0.742], ["2017-09-16", 0.672], ["2017-09-17", 0.672], ["2017-09-17", 0.666], ["2017-09-17", 0.643], ["2017-09-18", 0.631], ["2017-09-18", 0.628], ["2017-09-19", 0.6], ["2017-09-19", 0.596], ["2017-09-19", 0.596], ["2017-09-20", 0.57], ["2017-09-20", 0.57], ["2017-09-20", 0.57], ["2017-09-20", 0.539], ["2017-09-21", 0.514], ["2017-09-21", 0.515], ["2017-09-22", 0.499], ["2017-09-22", 0.5], ["2017-09-23", 0.504], ["2017-09-23", 0.505], ["2017-09-23", 0.509], ["2017-09-23", 0.505], ["2017-09-24", 0.504], ["2017-09-24", 0.505], ["2017-09-25", 0.51], ["2017-09-25", 0.509], ["2017-09-26", 0.513], ["2017-09-27", 0.512], ["2017-09-27", 0.51], ["2017-09-28", 0.501], ["2017-09-28", 0.501], ["2017-09-28", 0.505], ["2017-09-29", 0.505], ["2017-09-29", 0.502], ["2017-09-30", 0.502], ["2017-09-30", 0.501], ["2017-10-01", 0.501], ["2017-10-01", 0.501], ["2017-10-02", 0.505], ["2017-10-02", 0.517], ["2017-10-02", 0.517], ["2017-10-03", 0.525], ["2017-10-03", 0.527], ["2017-10-04", 0.527], ["2017-10-04", 0.529], ["2017-10-05", 0.525], ["2017-10-05", 0.528], ["2017-10-06", 0.528], ["2017-10-06", 0.525], ["2017-10-07", 0.525], ["2017-10-07", 0.53], ["2017-10-07", 0.535], ["2017-10-08", 0.535], ["2017-10-08", 0.535], ["2017-10-08", 0.538], ["2017-10-09", 0.54], ["2017-10-09", 0.541], ["2017-10-09", 0.556], ["2017-10-10", 0.561], ["2017-10-10", 0.565], ["2017-10-11", 0.565], ["2017-10-11", 0.568], ["2017-10-11", 0.574], ["2017-10-12", 0.574], ["2017-10-12", 0.579], ["2017-10-13", 0.579], ["2017-10-13", 0.584], ["2017-10-14", 0.588], ["2017-10-14", 0.6], ["2017-10-15", 0.6], ["2017-10-15", 0.605], ["2017-10-15", 0.606], ["2017-10-16", 0.609], ["2017-10-16", 0.614], ["2017-10-17", 0.622], ["2017-10-17", 0.623], ["2017-10-17", 0.627], ["2017-10-18", 0.627], ["2017-10-18", 0.626], ["2017-10-19", 0.626], ["2017-10-21", 0.628], ["2017-10-21", 0.628], ["2017-10-22", 0.631], ["2017-10-23", 0.63], ["2017-10-23", 0.63], ["2017-10-23", 0.636], ["2017-10-24", 0.637], ["2017-10-24", 0.637], ["2017-10-25", 0.639], ["2017-10-26", 0.643], ["2017-10-26", 0.646], ["2017-10-27", 0.648], ["2017-10-28", 0.65], ["2017-10-28", 0.65], ["2017-10-29", 0.649], ["2017-10-29", 0.647], ["2017-10-30", 0.645], ["2017-10-30", 0.646]] | https://www.metaculus.com/api2/questions/538/ | Not applicable/available for this question. | Economics & Business | The split of Bitcoin into Bitcoin and Bitcoin cash was occasioned by two irreconcilable factions in disagreement over how Bitcoin should scale in the future.
After an initial rally, as of question launch Bitcoin cash has been on a steady downslide while Bitcoin itself has been gaining.
Will Bitcoin cash continue to fade into relative unimportance, as opposed to rallying into another major currency?
Resolution is positive if on both Nov. 15, 2017, and Nov. 30, 2017, Bitcoin cash has a market capitalization (as reported on coinmarketcap opening at day opening) of less than 10% that of Bitcoin; resolution is negative otherwise. | true | 2017-11-01 | Will Bitcoin Cash fade into oblivion? | metaculus | 0 |
2017-10-16 | 2017-09-01 | [] | binary | [["2017-09-15", 0.19], ["2017-09-15", 0.19], ["2017-09-15", 0.137], ["2017-09-15", 0.137], ["2017-09-15", 0.242], ["2017-09-15", 0.242], ["2017-09-15", 0.282], ["2017-09-15", 0.302], ["2017-09-15", 0.322], ["2017-09-15", 0.322], ["2017-09-15", 0.342], ["2017-09-15", 0.332], ["2017-09-15", 0.222], ["2017-09-15", 0.212], ["2017-09-16", 0.237], ["2017-09-16", 0.237], ["2017-09-16", 0.228], ["2017-09-16", 0.231], ["2017-09-16", 0.288], ["2017-09-16", 0.288], ["2017-09-19", 0.342], ["2017-09-19", 0.376], ["2017-09-19", 0.362], ["2017-09-20", 0.362], ["2017-09-20", 0.364], ["2017-09-21", 0.363], ["2017-09-21", 0.368], ["2017-09-21", 0.368], ["2017-09-21", 0.368], ["2017-09-21", 0.358], ["2017-09-22", 0.358], ["2017-09-23", 0.372], ["2017-09-24", 0.372], ["2017-09-24", 0.372], ["2017-09-26", 0.382], ["2017-09-26", 0.375], ["2017-09-26", 0.375], ["2017-09-27", 0.362], ["2017-09-27", 0.355], ["2017-09-27", 0.356], ["2017-09-28", 0.369], ["2017-09-29", 0.37], ["2017-09-29", 0.37], ["2017-09-29", 0.374], ["2017-09-30", 0.374], ["2017-09-30", 0.374], ["2017-09-30", 0.38], ["2017-09-30", 0.378], ["2017-09-30", 0.378], ["2017-09-30", 0.385], ["2017-09-30", 0.388], ["2017-09-30", 0.388], ["2017-09-30", 0.397], ["2017-09-30", 0.391], ["2017-10-01", 0.409], ["2017-10-01", 0.399], ["2017-10-01", 0.399], ["2017-10-01", 0.399]] | https://www.metaculus.com/api2/questions/541/ | Not applicable/available for this question. | Economics & Business | Regulation of virtual currencies and "initial coin offerings" by the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) is a matter of considerable importance and concern.
In late July 2017, the S.E.C. released an investigative report that established that DAO tokens, a digital asset, are securities, and additionally communicated that "U.S. securities laws may apply to offers, sales, and trading of interests in virtual organizations". The assertion of U.S. jurisdiction over cryptocurrency tokens has done little to stem the growing number of initial coin offerings, and the announcement leaves unclear what the legal consequences will be for initial coin offerings that occurred before the issuance of the report.
As of question writing, a search of "S.E.C. Initial coin offerings" on the NY times turns up two stories.
Will this query turn up four or more stories when run on October 15, 2017?
(This would include the first existing stories, i.e. two or more new stories.) | true | 2017-10-01 | More stories in the NY times about SEC regulation of initial coin offerings? | metaculus | 0 |
2017-11-21 | 2017-09-01 | [] | binary | [["2017-09-15", 0.15], ["2017-09-15", 0.223], ["2017-09-15", 0.223], ["2017-09-15", 0.223], ["2017-09-15", 0.156], ["2017-09-15", 0.132], ["2017-09-15", 0.114], ["2017-09-15", 0.112], ["2017-09-15", 0.121], ["2017-09-16", 0.129], ["2017-09-16", 0.139], ["2017-09-16", 0.131], ["2017-09-17", 0.137], ["2017-09-17", 0.137], ["2017-09-17", 0.132], ["2017-09-18", 0.144], ["2017-09-19", 0.158], ["2017-09-19", 0.158], ["2017-09-20", 0.191], ["2017-09-20", 0.191], ["2017-09-20", 0.188], ["2017-09-20", 0.19], ["2017-09-21", 0.197], ["2017-09-21", 0.197], ["2017-09-21", 0.195], ["2017-09-22", 0.211], ["2017-09-23", 0.22], ["2017-09-23", 0.22], ["2017-09-23", 0.225], ["2017-09-23", 0.23], ["2017-09-24", 0.227], ["2017-09-25", 0.24], ["2017-09-29", 0.236], ["2017-09-29", 0.236], ["2017-10-01", 0.229], ["2017-10-01", 0.233], ["2017-10-02", 0.238], ["2017-10-02", 0.241], ["2017-10-04", 0.234], ["2017-10-05", 0.234], ["2017-10-05", 0.234], ["2017-10-06", 0.234], ["2017-10-11", 0.237], ["2017-10-11", 0.237], ["2017-10-13", 0.235], ["2017-10-13", 0.235], ["2017-10-14", 0.233], ["2017-10-17", 0.235], ["2017-10-18", 0.235], ["2017-10-19", 0.24], ["2017-10-19", 0.235], ["2017-10-20", 0.232], ["2017-10-21", 0.229], ["2017-10-21", 0.228], ["2017-10-23", 0.232], ["2017-10-23", 0.231], ["2017-10-23", 0.231], ["2017-10-23", 0.232], ["2017-10-26", 0.23], ["2017-10-28", 0.23], ["2017-10-28", 0.232], ["2017-10-28", 0.232], ["2017-10-28", 0.228], ["2017-10-29", 0.23], ["2017-10-30", 0.228], ["2017-10-31", 0.226], ["2017-10-31", 0.226], ["2017-10-31", 0.233], ["2017-10-31", 0.233]] | https://www.metaculus.com/api2/questions/542/ | Not applicable/available for this question. | Security & Defense | Despite its being carefully designed for security, piles of hundred of millions of dollars lying around "in the bits" are bound to attract some clever schemes, and there have been a few quite notable thefts/swindles/heists of cryptocurrencies.
Biggest and most famous, probably, was Mt. Gox, in which per Wikipedia,
approximately 850,000 bitcoins belonging to customers and the company were missing and likely stolen, an amount valued at more than $450 million at the time.Although 200,000 bitcoins have since been "found", the reason(s) for the disappearance—theft, fraud, mismanagement, or a combination of these—were initially unclear.
Another major event was the DAO heist. Again per Wikipedia,
users exploited a vulnerability in the DAO code to enable them to siphon off one third of The DAO's funds to a subsidiary account. On 20 July 2016, the Ethereum community decided to hard-fork the Ethereum blockchain to restore virtually all funds to the original contract.
Will there be a significant theft of cryptocurrency during November 2017?
For an event to count as positive resolution it should fulfill the following criteria:
The total amount stolen/swindled/siphoned should must exceed $500,000 in value (using the cost of the currency at the time of theft.)
The event should be generally described in articles as a "theft" or similar words. (Rather than, for example, a "scam" or a "swindle.") Thus for example a "pump and run" scheme would not count, but impersonating an exchange or company server to redirect funds would.
The theft itself, in terms of coin transfer, should take place between Nov. 1 and Nov. 30, inclusive.
Resolution is still positive if the funds are "recovered" in some way, e.g. as in Ethereum's hard fork. | true | 2017-11-01 | A major "theft" of cryptocurrency in November 2017? | metaculus | 1 |
2017-11-02 | 2017-09-02 | [] | binary | [["2017-09-15", 0.02], ["2017-09-15", 0.11], ["2017-09-15", 0.09], ["2017-09-15", 0.092], ["2017-09-15", 0.105], ["2017-09-15", 0.118], ["2017-09-15", 0.118], ["2017-09-15", 0.105], ["2017-09-15", 0.105], ["2017-09-15", 0.134], ["2017-09-15", 0.228], ["2017-09-16", 0.198], ["2017-09-16", 0.177], ["2017-09-16", 0.169], ["2017-09-16", 0.165], ["2017-09-16", 0.155], ["2017-09-17", 0.158], ["2017-09-17", 0.158], ["2017-09-18", 0.171], ["2017-09-18", 0.167], ["2017-09-18", 0.168], ["2017-09-19", 0.164], ["2017-09-19", 0.164], ["2017-09-19", 0.172], ["2017-09-20", 0.178], ["2017-09-20", 0.178], ["2017-09-20", 0.194], ["2017-09-21", 0.194], ["2017-09-21", 0.19], ["2017-09-23", 0.184], ["2017-09-24", 0.183], ["2017-09-24", 0.164], ["2017-09-24", 0.158], ["2017-09-24", 0.15], ["2017-09-24", 0.15], ["2017-09-24", 0.151], ["2017-09-25", 0.15], ["2017-09-25", 0.151], ["2017-09-26", 0.151], ["2017-09-26", 0.16], ["2017-09-26", 0.16], ["2017-09-27", 0.158], ["2017-09-27", 0.159], ["2017-09-28", 0.161], ["2017-09-28", 0.165], ["2017-09-28", 0.167], ["2017-09-29", 0.173], ["2017-09-29", 0.173], ["2017-09-29", 0.183], ["2017-09-29", 0.183], ["2017-09-30", 0.192]] | https://www.metaculus.com/api2/questions/544/ | Not applicable/available for this question. | Economics & Business | The NASDAQ stock market, which opened for trading in 1971, was the world's first electronic stock market. Its well known benchmark, the NASDAQ Composite Index, is a market capitalization-weighted measure of the value of all the domestic and internationally based common stocks listed on the NASDAQ market. The index includes large-cap names such as Apple, Facebook, Google, and Microsoft.
Companies on the NASDAQ index were the darlings of the late-90s dot-com bubble, and drove the index to an intra-day high print of 5132.52 on March 10, 2000. The bubble burst shortly thereafter, and the index dipped to a low of 1108.49 on October 10th 2002.
Recently, the NASDAQ has reachieved its dot-com era highs. As of this writing, after the market close of September 1, 2017, it stands at 6,435.33.
The ongoing tech stock run-up, however, has been dwarfed by the success of bitcoin, which is is currently priced at $4833.05, having risen from roughly $1000 at the start of 2017.
Prior to December 1, 2017, will the numerical value of the dollar to bitcoin rate exceed the numerical value of the Nasdaq Composite Index? | true | 2017-09-30 | Passing the torch: Will a Bitcoin's dollar value exceed the Nasdaq Index value? | metaculus | 1 |
2019-01-01 | 2017-09-06 | [] | binary | [["2017-09-09", 0.05], ["2017-09-09", 0.078], ["2017-09-10", 0.061], ["2017-09-10", 0.061], ["2017-09-11", 0.1], ["2017-09-12", 0.1], ["2017-09-12", 0.106], ["2017-09-13", 0.103], ["2017-09-14", 0.121], ["2017-09-15", 0.116], ["2017-09-15", 0.14], ["2017-09-18", 0.14], ["2017-09-19", 0.146], ["2017-09-20", 0.142], ["2017-09-24", 0.142], ["2017-10-01", 0.141], ["2017-10-04", 0.145], ["2017-10-06", 0.144], ["2017-10-07", 0.144], ["2017-10-09", 0.141], ["2017-10-09", 0.14], ["2017-10-17", 0.141], ["2017-10-18", 0.131], ["2017-10-24", 0.131], ["2017-10-25", 0.146], ["2017-10-28", 0.143], ["2017-10-28", 0.14], ["2017-11-04", 0.139], ["2017-11-05", 0.139], ["2017-11-06", 0.139], ["2017-11-07", 0.134], ["2017-11-14", 0.134], ["2017-11-16", 0.141], ["2017-11-16", 0.143], ["2017-11-17", 0.143], ["2017-11-19", 0.14], ["2017-11-20", 0.137], ["2017-11-20", 0.135], ["2017-11-21", 0.135], ["2017-11-21", 0.139], ["2017-11-21", 0.139], ["2017-11-22", 0.137], ["2017-11-22", 0.137], ["2017-11-23", 0.137], ["2017-11-24", 0.137], ["2017-11-25", 0.135], ["2017-11-26", 0.137], ["2017-11-26", 0.14], ["2017-11-26", 0.139], ["2017-11-29", 0.139], ["2017-12-01", 0.138], ["2017-12-01", 0.137], ["2017-12-05", 0.135], ["2017-12-21", 0.135], ["2017-12-22", 0.134], ["2017-12-26", 0.137], ["2017-12-29", 0.139], ["2017-12-31", 0.139], ["2018-01-02", 0.138], ["2018-01-03", 0.139], ["2018-01-03", 0.139], ["2018-01-04", 0.148], ["2018-01-04", 0.147], ["2018-01-04", 0.146], ["2018-01-05", 0.147], ["2018-01-05", 0.147], ["2018-01-06", 0.146], ["2018-01-06", 0.145], ["2018-01-08", 0.144], ["2018-01-09", 0.144], ["2018-01-09", 0.144], ["2018-01-10", 0.145], ["2018-01-10", 0.144], ["2018-01-11", 0.144], ["2018-01-12", 0.145], ["2018-01-14", 0.144], ["2018-01-14", 0.143], ["2018-01-16", 0.144], ["2018-01-20", 0.144], ["2018-01-24", 0.141], ["2018-01-26", 0.14], ["2018-01-30", 0.14], ["2018-01-31", 0.139], ["2018-01-31", 0.138], ["2018-02-02", 0.141], ["2018-02-04", 0.14], ["2018-02-05", 0.139], ["2018-02-05", 0.14], ["2018-02-06", 0.14], ["2018-02-07", 0.141], ["2018-02-07", 0.14], ["2018-02-08", 0.139], ["2018-02-09", 0.139], ["2018-02-10", 0.141], ["2018-02-11", 0.139], ["2018-02-12", 0.139], ["2018-02-12", 0.138], ["2018-02-12", 0.137], ["2018-02-13", 0.137], ["2018-02-14", 0.136], ["2018-02-14", 0.136]] | https://www.metaculus.com/api2/questions/549/ | Not applicable/available for this question. | Security & Defense | Ted Koppel, of ABC News and Nightline fame, has been sounding the alarm about the vulnerability of the electrical grids in the U.S. to intentional sabotage.
In his book Lights Out, Koppel argues that the U.S. grid(s) are both so interconnected and so fragile that a well-crafted attack could knock out power for a multi-state region, leaving residents without electric power for months. Some other recent relevant references are here and here.
For the purposes of this question, an attack with less dramatic impact will do:
Between September 15, 2017 and December 30, 2018, will an intentional attack on our electrical power infrastructure knock out power for more than 30% of residents in one of the ten most populous U.S. cities for a period of 72 hours or more?
For a positive resolution, there must be a public statement by either a law enforcement organization or a utility company confirming that the outage was not an accident. The attack may be physical or a hacking/cyber attack. | true | 2018-02-15 | Will an attack on the US electric grid cause a significant power outage by end of 2018? | metaculus | 0 |
2017-10-17 | 2017-09-14 | [] | binary | [["2017-09-14", 0.12], ["2017-09-14", 0.12], ["2017-09-14", 0.445], ["2017-09-14", 0.445], ["2017-09-14", 0.363], ["2017-09-14", 0.293], ["2017-09-14", 0.23], ["2017-09-14", 0.314], ["2017-09-15", 0.294], ["2017-09-15", 0.294], ["2017-09-15", 0.291], ["2017-09-15", 0.298], ["2017-09-15", 0.294], ["2017-09-15", 0.294], ["2017-09-15", 0.29], ["2017-09-15", 0.29], ["2017-09-15", 0.318], ["2017-09-15", 0.322], ["2017-09-16", 0.322], ["2017-09-16", 0.334], ["2017-09-16", 0.359], ["2017-09-16", 0.359], ["2017-09-16", 0.352], ["2017-09-16", 0.349], ["2017-09-18", 0.332], ["2017-09-19", 0.331], ["2017-09-19", 0.331], ["2017-09-19", 0.334], ["2017-09-19", 0.335], ["2017-09-20", 0.335], ["2017-09-21", 0.31], ["2017-09-21", 0.31], ["2017-09-23", 0.31], ["2017-09-23", 0.306], ["2017-09-23", 0.307], ["2017-09-24", 0.293], ["2017-09-24", 0.291], ["2017-09-24", 0.283], ["2017-09-25", 0.283], ["2017-09-26", 0.28], ["2017-09-26", 0.279], ["2017-09-27", 0.28], ["2017-09-27", 0.307], ["2017-09-28", 0.31], ["2017-09-30", 0.315], ["2017-09-30", 0.309], ["2017-09-30", 0.309], ["2017-09-30", 0.311], ["2017-09-30", 0.309], ["2017-10-01", 0.309], ["2017-10-01", 0.3], ["2017-10-01", 0.299]] | https://www.metaculus.com/api2/questions/553/ | Not applicable/available for this question. | Economics & Business | In the popular financial press, the VIX Index is often referred to as the "fear gauge". In reality, it is a quantitative assessment of expected stock market volatility over the next thirty day period, and is computed from S&P 500 stock index option prices.
To rule-of-thumb accuracy, the numerical value of the VIX corresponds to the annualized one-sigma percentage change in the value of the S&P 500 Index over the next month. As of the opening of this question, the VIX stands just below 11, so very roughly speaking, this means that the market ascribes a 30% chance that stocks will have changed in price by more than 3.2% by mid-October 2017.
Typically, the value of the VIX lies between 12 and 20, but it regularly spikes during times of market turmoil. During the 2008 financial crisis, for example, the VIX briefly reached values above 80. So far during 2017, however, stock volatility has consistently tested near-record low levels, but jitters last month surrounding the situation on the Korean peninsula briefly caused the index to jump by more than 50%.
Prior to October 15, 2017, will the VIX Index have an intra-day print with a value above 25? | true | 2017-10-01 | Short-term increase in Market Volatility? | metaculus | 0 |
2017-12-05 | 2017-09-14 | [] | binary | [["2017-09-24", 0.37], ["2017-09-24", 0.37], ["2017-09-24", 0.285], ["2017-09-24", 0.268], ["2017-09-24", 0.268], ["2017-09-24", 0.274], ["2017-09-24", 0.274], ["2017-09-24", 0.327], ["2017-09-24", 0.299], ["2017-09-24", 0.299], ["2017-09-24", 0.267], ["2017-09-24", 0.245], ["2017-09-24", 0.236], ["2017-09-24", 0.242], ["2017-09-24", 0.244], ["2017-09-25", 0.23], ["2017-09-25", 0.218], ["2017-09-25", 0.218], ["2017-09-25", 0.214], ["2017-09-25", 0.214], ["2017-09-25", 0.2], ["2017-09-25", 0.2], ["2017-09-25", 0.21], ["2017-09-25", 0.21], ["2017-09-26", 0.218], ["2017-09-26", 0.218], ["2017-09-26", 0.218], ["2017-09-26", 0.225], ["2017-09-26", 0.224], ["2017-09-27", 0.224], ["2017-09-27", 0.22], ["2017-09-27", 0.224], ["2017-09-27", 0.233], ["2017-09-27", 0.24], ["2017-09-27", 0.238], ["2017-09-28", 0.238], ["2017-09-28", 0.231], ["2017-09-29", 0.227], ["2017-09-29", 0.25], ["2017-09-29", 0.25], ["2017-09-29", 0.242], ["2017-09-29", 0.248], ["2017-09-29", 0.249], ["2017-09-29", 0.254], ["2017-09-30", 0.254], ["2017-09-30", 0.258], ["2017-09-30", 0.257], ["2017-10-01", 0.264], ["2017-10-01", 0.264], ["2017-10-01", 0.266], ["2017-10-01", 0.267], ["2017-10-01", 0.272], ["2017-10-03", 0.272], ["2017-10-04", 0.272], ["2017-10-05", 0.27], ["2017-10-06", 0.274], ["2017-10-06", 0.274], ["2017-10-06", 0.272], ["2017-10-07", 0.272], ["2017-10-08", 0.274], ["2017-10-08", 0.274], ["2017-10-08", 0.278], ["2017-10-08", 0.278], ["2017-10-09", 0.278], ["2017-10-09", 0.28], ["2017-10-09", 0.278], ["2017-10-09", 0.278], ["2017-10-09", 0.279], ["2017-10-09", 0.281], ["2017-10-09", 0.281], ["2017-10-10", 0.286], ["2017-10-10", 0.286], ["2017-10-10", 0.289], ["2017-10-10", 0.286], ["2017-10-11", 0.289], ["2017-10-12", 0.288], ["2017-10-12", 0.298], ["2017-10-12", 0.298], ["2017-10-12", 0.309], ["2017-10-12", 0.309], ["2017-10-12", 0.319], ["2017-10-12", 0.313], ["2017-10-12", 0.313], ["2017-10-12", 0.317], ["2017-10-12", 0.319], ["2017-10-13", 0.319], ["2017-10-13", 0.323], ["2017-10-13", 0.323], ["2017-10-13", 0.32], ["2017-10-13", 0.326], ["2017-10-14", 0.322], ["2017-10-14", 0.322], ["2017-10-14", 0.322], ["2017-10-14", 0.322], ["2017-10-14", 0.319], ["2017-10-15", 0.319], ["2017-10-15", 0.328]] | https://www.metaculus.com/api2/questions/554/ | Not applicable/available for this question. | Politics & Governance | All of the largest, and probably all, cryptocurrency exchange in China have as of question writing announced that they will shut down, due to China's ban on cryptocurrency trading and ICOs.
Other countries seem be less willing (and may be less able) to ban cryptocurrency exchanges, but it could happen. We ask:
Will a major cryptocurrency exchange outside of China shut down by Nov. 30 2017 citing a request or order from its host country's national government?
For these purposes we'll consider a "major" exchange to mean one with a daily trading volume of >$5 M as of 9/24/17, which includes about the top 40 exchanges. "Shut down" will mean that an official announcement by the exchange is released stating that all cryptocurrency trading will shut down by a specific date.
(Edit 9/24/17: changed "major" criterion to start at $5M not $50M in daily trading volume, which was a typo.) | true | 2017-10-15 | Will a country other than China shut down a cryptocurrency exchange by Dec. 1? | metaculus | 0 |
2023-01-01 | 2017-09-22 | ["https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Category_4_Atlantic_hurricanes#Landfalls", "https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Category_5_Atlantic_hurricanes#Landfalls", "https://www.cnn.com/2022/09/28/weather/hurricane-ian-florida-path-wednesday/index.html"] | binary | [["2017-09-25", 0.6], ["2017-10-01", 0.514], ["2017-10-04", 0.514], ["2017-10-09", 0.522], ["2017-10-13", 0.537], ["2017-10-18", 0.537], ["2017-11-14", 0.526], ["2017-11-24", 0.526], ["2017-12-13", 0.532], ["2018-01-04", 0.532], ["2018-01-10", 0.545], ["2018-01-18", 0.556], ["2018-01-30", 0.541], ["2018-02-06", 0.541], ["2018-02-13", 0.54], ["2018-03-08", 0.552], ["2018-03-12", 0.553], ["2018-03-18", 0.553], ["2018-03-25", 0.553], ["2018-04-05", 0.564], ["2018-04-15", 0.564], ["2018-04-21", 0.58], ["2018-04-29", 0.58], ["2018-05-06", 0.586], ["2018-05-12", 0.59], ["2018-05-17", 0.591], ["2018-05-23", 0.595], ["2018-05-28", 0.595], ["2018-06-02", 0.594], ["2018-06-06", 0.594], ["2018-06-11", 0.592], ["2018-06-13", 0.589], ["2018-06-25", 0.589], ["2018-06-25", 0.592], ["2018-07-04", 0.599], ["2018-07-12", 0.599], ["2018-07-18", 0.6], ["2018-07-21", 0.604], ["2018-08-06", 0.609], ["2018-08-12", 0.607], ["2018-08-16", 0.608], ["2018-08-20", 0.608], ["2018-08-27", 0.609], ["2018-09-02", 0.614], ["2018-09-07", 0.619], ["2018-09-11", 0.639], ["2018-09-17", 0.636], ["2018-09-20", 0.638], ["2018-09-27", 0.637], ["2018-10-06", 0.637], ["2018-10-09", 0.636], ["2018-10-14", 0.638], ["2018-10-17", 0.638], ["2018-10-21", 0.64], ["2018-10-28", 0.641], ["2018-11-16", 0.641], ["2018-11-17", 0.64], ["2018-12-13", 0.64], ["2018-12-18", 0.639], ["2018-12-27", 0.639], ["2019-01-01", 0.638], ["2019-01-15", 0.638], ["2019-01-18", 0.64], ["2019-01-31", 0.639], ["2019-02-06", 0.633], ["2019-02-14", 0.633], ["2019-03-01", 0.633], ["2019-03-27", 0.634], ["2019-04-14", 0.634], ["2019-04-19", 0.604], ["2019-04-25", 0.597], ["2019-05-01", 0.597], ["2019-05-05", 0.595], ["2019-05-14", 0.595], ["2019-05-23", 0.592], ["2019-05-30", 0.594], ["2019-06-07", 0.596], ["2019-06-16", 0.596], ["2019-07-04", 0.599], ["2019-07-20", 0.599], ["2019-07-31", 0.596], ["2019-08-05", 0.595], ["2019-08-08", 0.595], ["2019-08-13", 0.595], ["2019-08-18", 0.594], ["2019-08-29", 0.595], ["2019-09-05", 0.591], ["2019-09-12", 0.59], ["2019-09-19", 0.59], ["2019-09-26", 0.592], ["2019-10-03", 0.596], ["2019-10-11", 0.596], ["2019-10-16", 0.596], ["2019-10-23", 0.596], ["2019-10-28", 0.587], ["2019-11-04", 0.587], ["2019-11-08", 0.587], ["2019-11-14", 0.584], ["2019-11-19", 0.582], ["2019-11-24", 0.579], ["2019-11-29", 0.556]] | https://www.metaculus.com/api2/questions/557/ | Not applicable/available for this question. | Environment & Energy | Prior to 2017, the United States had never recorded landfall of more than one hurricane Category 4 or stronger in a single year. Since 1856, only 18 Category 4 and five Category 5 storms have made landfall in the United States. But in 2017 both Hurricanes Harvey and Irma struck as Category 4 storms, hitting Texas and Florida, respectively. Subsequently, hurricane Jose developed into a Category 4 and hurricane Maria strengthened into a Category 5 storm, devastating Puerto Rico.
The highly destructive Atlantic hurricane season has focused attention on the relationship between climate change and the strength of hurricanes. Because warm ocean water fuels hurricanes and warmer water = stronger hurricanes (and climate change = warmer water) stronger storms may become the norm in future decades.
Will two Category 4+ hurricanes hit the United States within the same year in the next five years?
This question will resolve as positive if at least two named Atlantic hurricanes, both classified as Category 4 or 5 storms upon landfall, arrive on the territory of the United States before December 31, 2022. This resolution criteria includes landfall on the Florida Keys or other islands that are part of one of the 50 United States. | true | 2019-11-30 | Another hit by two Cat 4+ hurricanes in the same year? | metaculus | 0 |
2020-05-21 | 2017-09-22 | [] | binary | [["2017-09-25", 0.495], ["2017-09-25", 0.495], ["2017-09-26", 0.473], ["2017-09-26", 0.468], ["2017-09-26", 0.47], ["2017-09-26", 0.455], ["2017-09-26", 0.504], ["2017-09-27", 0.478], ["2017-09-29", 0.478], ["2017-10-01", 0.479], ["2017-10-04", 0.485], ["2017-10-04", 0.485], ["2017-10-08", 0.505], ["2017-10-09", 0.505], ["2017-10-09", 0.505], ["2017-10-31", 0.509], ["2017-11-01", 0.507], ["2017-11-07", 0.497], ["2017-11-10", 0.497], ["2017-11-15", 0.516], ["2017-12-22", 0.515], ["2018-01-03", 0.515], ["2018-01-03", 0.493], ["2018-01-06", 0.493], ["2018-01-08", 0.481], ["2018-01-10", 0.466], ["2018-01-14", 0.462], ["2018-01-19", 0.458], ["2018-02-03", 0.457], ["2018-02-04", 0.45], ["2018-02-16", 0.45], ["2018-02-19", 0.451], ["2018-03-12", 0.451], ["2018-03-25", 0.467], ["2018-03-27", 0.459], ["2018-04-03", 0.453], ["2018-04-05", 0.452], ["2018-04-07", 0.452], ["2018-04-08", 0.455], ["2018-04-08", 0.459], ["2018-04-12", 0.454], ["2018-04-14", 0.456], ["2018-04-15", 0.456], ["2018-04-17", 0.454], ["2018-04-20", 0.456], ["2018-04-24", 0.456], ["2018-04-28", 0.459], ["2018-04-29", 0.459], ["2018-04-29", 0.459], ["2018-04-30", 0.471], ["2018-05-01", 0.471], ["2018-05-14", 0.477], ["2018-05-16", 0.473], ["2018-05-17", 0.473], ["2018-05-26", 0.473], ["2018-05-27", 0.464], ["2018-05-27", 0.464], ["2018-05-31", 0.464], ["2018-06-02", 0.462], ["2018-06-03", 0.462], ["2018-06-06", 0.461], ["2018-06-08", 0.463], ["2018-06-08", 0.463], ["2018-06-09", 0.46], ["2018-06-12", 0.459], ["2018-06-12", 0.462], ["2018-06-15", 0.462], ["2018-06-15", 0.466], ["2018-06-17", 0.466], ["2018-06-17", 0.466], ["2018-06-18", 0.465], ["2018-06-19", 0.464], ["2018-06-19", 0.467], ["2018-06-19", 0.465], ["2018-06-19", 0.465], ["2018-06-19", 0.462], ["2018-06-20", 0.462], ["2018-06-20", 0.467], ["2018-06-21", 0.467], ["2018-06-23", 0.467], ["2018-06-24", 0.466], ["2018-06-25", 0.466], ["2018-06-25", 0.467], ["2018-06-26", 0.464], ["2018-06-26", 0.464], ["2018-06-27", 0.463], ["2018-06-27", 0.463], ["2018-06-27", 0.453], ["2018-06-27", 0.45], ["2018-06-27", 0.45], ["2018-06-27", 0.449], ["2018-06-27", 0.447], ["2018-06-28", 0.447], ["2018-06-28", 0.442], ["2018-06-28", 0.442], ["2018-06-28", 0.44], ["2018-06-28", 0.44], ["2018-06-29", 0.439], ["2018-06-29", 0.438], ["2018-06-29", 0.438], ["2018-06-30", 0.437]] | https://www.metaculus.com/api2/questions/558/ | Not applicable/available for this question. | Environment & Energy | The vaquita porpoise (Phocoena sinus) is the most endangered cetacean species, with recent estimates of population around 30 individuals. The species is located exclusively in the Gulf of California, limiting its potential habitats, and has been decimated by fishermen who employ highly effective gillnets to catch the totoaba fish, also critically endangered and highly valued in Chinese markets.
Mexico has declared bans on gill netting in an attempt to save the vaquita, but populations have continued to decline.
Conservationists are hoping to develop a plan to bring some vaquitas into captivity as a last-ditch attempt to save the species, but by the time such a plan is implemented, it may be too late.
Will the vaquita be declared extinct before 2020?
This question will resolve as positive if the first IUCN Red List update published after January 1, 2020 lists Phocoena sinus as extinct. | true | 2018-06-30 | Vaquita porpoise declared extinct before 2020? | metaculus | 0 |
2017-12-04 | 2017-09-22 | [] | binary | [["2017-09-23", 0.32], ["2017-09-23", 0.26], ["2017-09-23", 0.483], ["2017-09-23", 0.483], ["2017-09-23", 0.55], ["2017-09-23", 0.55], ["2017-09-23", 0.588], ["2017-09-23", 0.636], ["2017-09-23", 0.64], ["2017-09-23", 0.64], ["2017-09-23", 0.746], ["2017-09-23", 0.746], ["2017-09-23", 0.754], ["2017-09-24", 0.684], ["2017-09-24", 0.651], ["2017-09-24", 0.606], ["2017-09-24", 0.606], ["2017-09-24", 0.606], ["2017-09-24", 0.606], ["2017-09-24", 0.543], ["2017-09-24", 0.543], ["2017-09-24", 0.559], ["2017-09-24", 0.559], ["2017-09-25", 0.549], ["2017-09-25", 0.572], ["2017-09-25", 0.578], ["2017-09-25", 0.578], ["2017-09-25", 0.583], ["2017-09-25", 0.581], ["2017-09-25", 0.57], ["2017-09-25", 0.57], ["2017-09-25", 0.563], ["2017-09-25", 0.575], ["2017-09-26", 0.58], ["2017-09-26", 0.58], ["2017-09-26", 0.581], ["2017-09-26", 0.579], ["2017-09-26", 0.579], ["2017-09-26", 0.589], ["2017-09-26", 0.589], ["2017-09-27", 0.59], ["2017-09-27", 0.605], ["2017-09-27", 0.612], ["2017-09-27", 0.608], ["2017-09-27", 0.614], ["2017-09-27", 0.614], ["2017-09-28", 0.617], ["2017-09-29", 0.628], ["2017-09-29", 0.639], ["2017-09-29", 0.642], ["2017-09-30", 0.639], ["2017-09-30", 0.644], ["2017-09-30", 0.646], ["2017-09-30", 0.644], ["2017-09-30", 0.644], ["2017-10-01", 0.643], ["2017-10-01", 0.643], ["2017-10-02", 0.638], ["2017-10-02", 0.638], ["2017-10-02", 0.648], ["2017-10-02", 0.65], ["2017-10-04", 0.65], ["2017-10-05", 0.641], ["2017-10-05", 0.645], ["2017-10-05", 0.645], ["2017-10-05", 0.637], ["2017-10-06", 0.635], ["2017-10-06", 0.635], ["2017-10-07", 0.634], ["2017-10-09", 0.634], ["2017-10-12", 0.632], ["2017-10-13", 0.632], ["2017-10-14", 0.641], ["2017-10-14", 0.641], ["2017-10-14", 0.648], ["2017-10-14", 0.648], ["2017-10-14", 0.659], ["2017-10-14", 0.664], ["2017-10-14", 0.664], ["2017-10-14", 0.664], ["2017-10-14", 0.69], ["2017-10-14", 0.69], ["2017-10-14", 0.689], ["2017-10-14", 0.695], ["2017-10-14", 0.693], ["2017-10-14", 0.694], ["2017-10-14", 0.703], ["2017-10-14", 0.703], ["2017-10-14", 0.703], ["2017-10-15", 0.713], ["2017-10-15", 0.72], ["2017-10-15", 0.72], ["2017-10-15", 0.719], ["2017-10-15", 0.724]] | https://www.metaculus.com/api2/questions/559/ | Not applicable/available for this question. | Economics & Business | There has long been tension between ride-share company Uber and many of the municipalities in which it operates. This had risen to a head recently as the city of London has declined to renew Uber's license.
Very quickly, a petition has been launched to restore the license (and service). How will it all shake out. To be definite we ask:
On December 1, will it be possible to take an Uber between generic pairs of points in London using Uber's app?
Resolution is positive if one can use Uber in substantially the same manner as was possible on or around Sept. 15, 2017, even if the number of drivers is smaller (within a factor of 5 of the Sept. 15 number.) | true | 2017-10-15 | Will Uber be operating in London on Dec. 1? | metaculus | 1 |
2017-12-01 | 2017-09-23 | [] | binary | [["2017-09-24", 0.27], ["2017-09-24", 0.27], ["2017-09-24", 0.29], ["2017-09-24", 0.33], ["2017-09-24", 0.33], ["2017-09-24", 0.448], ["2017-09-24", 0.622], ["2017-09-24", 0.627], ["2017-09-24", 0.661], ["2017-09-24", 0.688], ["2017-09-24", 0.699], ["2017-09-24", 0.699], ["2017-09-24", 0.722], ["2017-09-24", 0.762], ["2017-09-24", 0.761], ["2017-09-25", 0.769], ["2017-09-25", 0.783], ["2017-09-25", 0.794], ["2017-09-25", 0.791], ["2017-09-25", 0.792], ["2017-09-25", 0.792], ["2017-09-25", 0.792], ["2017-09-25", 0.781], ["2017-09-25", 0.782], ["2017-09-25", 0.782], ["2017-09-25", 0.791], ["2017-09-25", 0.801], ["2017-09-25", 0.794], ["2017-09-25", 0.794], ["2017-09-25", 0.799], ["2017-09-25", 0.799], ["2017-09-25", 0.797], ["2017-09-25", 0.796], ["2017-09-25", 0.795], ["2017-09-25", 0.773], ["2017-09-25", 0.773], ["2017-09-26", 0.773], ["2017-09-26", 0.771], ["2017-09-26", 0.775], ["2017-09-26", 0.77], ["2017-09-26", 0.764], ["2017-09-27", 0.769], ["2017-09-27", 0.769], ["2017-09-27", 0.768], ["2017-09-27", 0.772], ["2017-09-27", 0.753], ["2017-09-27", 0.753], ["2017-09-28", 0.741], ["2017-09-28", 0.741], ["2017-09-28", 0.741], ["2017-09-29", 0.738], ["2017-09-29", 0.736], ["2017-09-30", 0.736], ["2017-09-30", 0.731], ["2017-09-30", 0.729], ["2017-09-30", 0.728], ["2017-09-30", 0.728], ["2017-09-30", 0.726], ["2017-09-30", 0.732], ["2017-10-01", 0.729], ["2017-10-01", 0.729], ["2017-10-01", 0.727], ["2017-10-01", 0.727], ["2017-10-01", 0.727], ["2017-10-01", 0.726], ["2017-10-01", 0.723], ["2017-10-02", 0.721], ["2017-10-02", 0.714], ["2017-10-04", 0.719], ["2017-10-04", 0.723], ["2017-10-05", 0.723], ["2017-10-06", 0.725], ["2017-10-07", 0.725], ["2017-10-07", 0.726], ["2017-10-08", 0.726], ["2017-10-08", 0.724], ["2017-10-08", 0.723], ["2017-10-08", 0.723], ["2017-10-08", 0.725], ["2017-10-08", 0.725], ["2017-10-09", 0.728], ["2017-10-09", 0.728], ["2017-10-09", 0.73], ["2017-10-09", 0.73], ["2017-10-10", 0.728], ["2017-10-10", 0.729], ["2017-10-12", 0.731], ["2017-10-12", 0.731], ["2017-10-13", 0.732], ["2017-10-13", 0.732], ["2017-10-14", 0.734], ["2017-10-14", 0.734], ["2017-10-14", 0.739], ["2017-10-14", 0.739], ["2017-10-14", 0.739], ["2017-10-14", 0.74], ["2017-10-15", 0.74], ["2017-10-15", 0.742], ["2017-10-15", 0.742]] | https://www.metaculus.com/api2/questions/560/ | Not applicable/available for this question. | Politics & Governance | There are a number of technologies that may fundamentally rework society over the next few decades that are, nonetheless, having almost little to no attention paid to them by US policymakers.
One of them may be cryptocurrencies and blockchain technologies. As of question launch, a search of Trump's speech transcripts at FactCheck.org shows no mention of "Bitcoin" or "Cryptocurrency."
Will this continue until Dec. 1 2017?
Resolution is positive if neither term shows up in FactCheck.org's transcripts on Dec. 1, 2017. | true | 2017-10-15 | Will Trump go two more months without uttering the words "Bitcoin" or "Cryptocurrency"? | metaculus | 1 |
2018-04-10 | 2017-09-23 | [] | binary | [["2017-09-26", 0.84], ["2017-09-26", 0.84], ["2017-09-26", 0.87], ["2017-09-26", 0.86], ["2017-09-26", 0.814], ["2017-09-26", 0.812], ["2017-09-26", 0.817], ["2017-09-27", 0.817], ["2017-09-27", 0.802], ["2017-09-27", 0.786], ["2017-09-27", 0.808], ["2017-09-27", 0.804], ["2017-09-27", 0.804], ["2017-09-27", 0.737], ["2017-09-27", 0.737], ["2017-09-27", 0.731], ["2017-09-28", 0.739], ["2017-09-28", 0.739], ["2017-09-28", 0.752], ["2017-09-28", 0.76], ["2017-09-29", 0.753], ["2017-09-29", 0.753], ["2017-09-30", 0.745], ["2017-09-30", 0.738], ["2017-09-30", 0.738], ["2017-10-01", 0.727], ["2017-10-01", 0.717], ["2017-10-01", 0.717], ["2017-10-01", 0.717], ["2017-10-02", 0.724], ["2017-10-02", 0.721], ["2017-10-04", 0.721], ["2017-10-05", 0.727], ["2017-10-05", 0.727], ["2017-10-05", 0.725], ["2017-10-07", 0.722], ["2017-10-08", 0.725], ["2017-10-08", 0.722], ["2017-10-09", 0.719], ["2017-10-11", 0.719], ["2017-10-12", 0.704], ["2017-10-13", 0.704], ["2017-10-14", 0.704], ["2017-10-14", 0.704], ["2017-10-14", 0.705], ["2017-10-17", 0.705], ["2017-10-17", 0.709], ["2017-10-18", 0.709], ["2017-10-19", 0.701], ["2017-10-19", 0.704], ["2017-10-22", 0.704], ["2017-10-23", 0.701], ["2017-10-23", 0.701], ["2017-10-25", 0.705], ["2017-10-26", 0.707], ["2017-10-26", 0.707], ["2017-10-26", 0.71], ["2017-10-30", 0.71], ["2017-10-30", 0.711], ["2017-10-30", 0.712], ["2017-10-30", 0.712], ["2017-10-30", 0.712], ["2017-10-30", 0.718], ["2017-10-31", 0.718], ["2017-10-31", 0.721], ["2017-10-31", 0.721], ["2017-10-31", 0.727], ["2017-10-31", 0.727], ["2017-10-31", 0.729], ["2017-11-01", 0.734]] | https://www.metaculus.com/api2/questions/561/ | There are a number of technologies that may fundamentally rework society over the next few decades that are, nonetheless, having almost little to no attention paid to them by US policymakers.
One of them is almost certainly Artificial Intelligence. As of question launch, a search of Trump's speech transcripts at FactCheck.org shows no mention of "Artificial Intelligence." | Science & Tech | Will this continue until Dec. 31 2017?
Resolution is positive if "Artificial Intelligence" does not show up in FactCheck.org's transcripts on Dec. 31, 2017. | true | 2017-11-01 | Will Trump finish the year without mentioning the phrase "Artificial Intelligence"? | metaculus | 1 |
2019-12-31 | 2017-09-25 | ["https://www.ft.com/content/60ef876f-5b83-43d5-bf32-ea102e542545"] | binary | [["2017-09-28", 0.085], ["2017-10-01", 0.158], ["2017-10-04", 0.183], ["2017-10-06", 0.171], ["2017-10-09", 0.183], ["2017-10-12", 0.183], ["2017-10-15", 0.19], ["2017-10-18", 0.185], ["2017-10-22", 0.173], ["2017-10-24", 0.177], ["2017-10-28", 0.175], ["2017-11-01", 0.171], ["2017-11-04", 0.186], ["2017-11-11", 0.185], ["2017-11-15", 0.182], ["2017-11-19", 0.194], ["2017-11-22", 0.209], ["2017-12-16", 0.208], ["2017-12-16", 0.203], ["2017-12-31", 0.202], ["2018-01-03", 0.198], ["2018-01-05", 0.197], ["2018-01-09", 0.197], ["2018-01-15", 0.196], ["2018-02-01", 0.193], ["2018-02-01", 0.193], ["2018-03-05", 0.193], ["2018-03-08", 0.195], ["2018-03-12", 0.195], ["2018-03-16", 0.192], ["2018-03-24", 0.192], ["2018-03-27", 0.196], ["2018-03-29", 0.196], ["2018-04-01", 0.195], ["2018-04-05", 0.197], ["2018-04-07", 0.198], ["2018-04-19", 0.198], ["2018-04-23", 0.197], ["2018-04-24", 0.204], ["2018-04-29", 0.204], ["2018-05-03", 0.207], ["2018-05-06", 0.209], ["2018-05-08", 0.205], ["2018-05-13", 0.202], ["2018-05-15", 0.203], ["2018-05-17", 0.203], ["2018-05-20", 0.204], ["2018-05-23", 0.201], ["2018-05-26", 0.201], ["2018-05-28", 0.199], ["2018-06-01", 0.205], ["2018-06-04", 0.207], ["2018-06-07", 0.203], ["2018-06-20", 0.203], ["2018-06-24", 0.2], ["2018-07-01", 0.199], ["2018-07-04", 0.197], ["2018-07-11", 0.198], ["2018-07-13", 0.198], ["2018-07-16", 0.197], ["2018-07-19", 0.195], ["2018-07-22", 0.194], ["2018-07-25", 0.189], ["2018-07-27", 0.186], ["2018-07-31", 0.186], ["2018-08-03", 0.184], ["2018-08-05", 0.185], ["2018-08-08", 0.18], ["2018-08-10", 0.179], ["2018-08-13", 0.177], ["2018-08-29", 0.177], ["2018-09-01", 0.175], ["2018-09-05", 0.177], ["2018-09-10", 0.177], ["2018-09-12", 0.175], ["2018-09-14", 0.174], ["2018-09-17", 0.173], ["2018-09-19", 0.172], ["2018-09-22", 0.175], ["2018-09-27", 0.175], ["2018-10-04", 0.179], ["2018-10-08", 0.179], ["2018-10-12", 0.178], ["2018-10-15", 0.177], ["2018-10-17", 0.176], ["2018-10-23", 0.177], ["2018-10-27", 0.176], ["2018-10-30", 0.176], ["2018-11-04", 0.174], ["2018-11-08", 0.175], ["2018-11-12", 0.175], ["2018-11-20", 0.175], ["2018-11-22", 0.174], ["2018-11-30", 0.174], ["2018-12-01", 0.174], ["2018-12-10", 0.174], ["2018-12-13", 0.173], ["2018-12-17", 0.173], ["2018-12-27", 0.173], ["2018-12-31", 0.171], ["2018-12-31", 0.17]] | https://www.metaculus.com/api2/questions/562/ | Not applicable/available for this question. | Environment & Energy | In 1936, the last known thylacine (also called a Tasmanian tiger) died in a zoo in Hobart, Tasmania. After that the species was presumed extinct, but sightings of thylacines persisted in the following decades, suggesting that some thylacines may have survived.
Several sightings have allegedly captured footage of the animal, and while the footage is compelling, it is not unambiguous.
In September 2017, another thylacine video surfaced, taken using an automated camera trap - although the identity of the animal in the video is a point of controversy among the thylacine community.
In fall 2017, biologist Bill Laurance plans to deploy 50 camera traps throughout the Cape York peninsula in Tasmania, hoping to catch a glimpse of an elusive thylacine - if any still exist.
Will a living thylacine be documented conclusively by 2020?
This question will resolve as positive if credible, unambiguous evidence of a contemporary, living thylacine is reported by a credible news agency on or before Jan 1, 2020. Evidence may include, but is not limited to, clear photographic or video documentation of a living animal. | true | 2019-01-01 | A living thylacine (Tasmanian tiger) by 2020? | metaculus | 0 |
2018-12-31 | 2017-09-25 | [] | binary | [["2017-09-27", 0.24], ["2017-09-27", 0.292], ["2017-09-28", 0.204], ["2017-09-28", 0.218], ["2017-09-28", 0.242], ["2017-09-28", 0.237], ["2017-09-28", 0.237], ["2017-09-29", 0.268], ["2017-09-29", 0.271], ["2017-09-29", 0.269], ["2017-09-29", 0.271], ["2017-09-29", 0.271], ["2017-09-29", 0.288], ["2017-09-30", 0.287], ["2017-09-30", 0.28], ["2017-09-30", 0.284], ["2017-09-30", 0.284], ["2017-09-30", 0.274], ["2017-10-01", 0.279], ["2017-10-01", 0.276], ["2017-10-01", 0.274], ["2017-10-01", 0.273], ["2017-10-02", 0.276], ["2017-10-02", 0.275], ["2017-10-02", 0.275], ["2017-10-02", 0.281], ["2017-10-02", 0.275], ["2017-10-02", 0.271], ["2017-10-03", 0.271], ["2017-10-03", 0.266], ["2017-10-03", 0.263], ["2017-10-03", 0.259], ["2017-10-03", 0.266], ["2017-10-04", 0.266], ["2017-10-04", 0.266], ["2017-10-04", 0.279], ["2017-10-04", 0.283], ["2017-10-05", 0.283], ["2017-10-05", 0.281], ["2017-10-05", 0.277], ["2017-10-05", 0.277], ["2017-10-05", 0.279], ["2017-10-06", 0.279], ["2017-10-06", 0.288], ["2017-10-06", 0.294], ["2017-10-06", 0.294], ["2017-10-06", 0.295], ["2017-10-07", 0.296], ["2017-10-08", 0.293], ["2017-10-09", 0.293], ["2017-10-09", 0.293], ["2017-10-09", 0.289], ["2017-10-09", 0.289], ["2017-10-10", 0.284], ["2017-10-11", 0.284], ["2017-10-11", 0.28], ["2017-10-11", 0.28], ["2017-10-11", 0.277], ["2017-10-12", 0.283], ["2017-10-12", 0.283], ["2017-10-12", 0.283], ["2017-10-12", 0.283], ["2017-10-13", 0.282], ["2017-10-14", 0.278], ["2017-10-14", 0.278], ["2017-10-14", 0.279], ["2017-10-14", 0.277], ["2017-10-15", 0.277], ["2017-10-15", 0.276], ["2017-10-16", 0.276], ["2017-10-17", 0.276], ["2017-10-17", 0.274], ["2017-10-18", 0.278], ["2017-10-19", 0.276], ["2017-10-19", 0.275], ["2017-10-19", 0.275], ["2017-10-20", 0.278], ["2017-10-21", 0.279], ["2017-10-22", 0.279], ["2017-10-23", 0.279], ["2017-10-24", 0.278], ["2017-10-25", 0.278], ["2017-10-26", 0.278], ["2017-10-27", 0.279], ["2017-10-28", 0.275], ["2017-10-28", 0.274], ["2017-10-29", 0.273], ["2017-10-30", 0.271], ["2017-10-30", 0.268], ["2017-10-31", 0.267], ["2017-10-31", 0.267], ["2017-11-01", 0.266], ["2017-11-02", 0.266], ["2017-11-02", 0.262], ["2017-11-07", 0.263], ["2017-11-07", 0.27], ["2017-11-07", 0.27], ["2017-11-13", 0.27], ["2017-11-14", 0.266], ["2017-11-14", 0.266], ["2017-11-14", 0.266]] | https://www.metaculus.com/api2/questions/563/ | Not applicable/available for this question. | Security & Defense | Ever-heightening rhetoric on both the North Korean and US side is creating a dangerous situation in North Korea, with both sides flat-out threatening to obliterate the other.
While most analysts believe that an unprovoked nuclear strike is unlikely, there are concerns about many pathways to an steady escalation that could lead to a significant conventional or even nuclear war, as outlined in this sobering article.
Will a US-led military action occur in N. Korea by the end of 2018?
Question resolves as positive if a credible news source reports that a branch of the US military or contractors employed by the US have taken military action in N. Korea that result in damage to N. Korean assets and/or personnel. This includes response to a North Korean action or attack (subject of a separate question) or US-initiated aggression. The action must take place on N. Korean soil or over N. Korean airspace. | true | 2017-11-15 | Will the US take military action in N. Korea? | metaculus | 0 |
2017-11-24 | 2017-09-25 | [] | binary | [["2017-09-28", 0.2], ["2017-09-28", 0.225], ["2017-09-28", 0.26], ["2017-09-28", 0.258], ["2017-09-28", 0.352], ["2017-09-28", 0.385], ["2017-09-28", 0.363], ["2017-09-28", 0.4], ["2017-09-28", 0.421], ["2017-09-29", 0.428], ["2017-09-29", 0.428], ["2017-09-29", 0.418], ["2017-09-29", 0.408], ["2017-09-29", 0.417], ["2017-09-29", 0.417], ["2017-09-29", 0.412], ["2017-09-29", 0.421], ["2017-09-29", 0.421], ["2017-09-30", 0.424], ["2017-09-30", 0.414], ["2017-09-30", 0.416], ["2017-09-30", 0.415], ["2017-09-30", 0.412], ["2017-09-30", 0.412], ["2017-09-30", 0.415], ["2017-09-30", 0.415], ["2017-10-01", 0.417], ["2017-10-01", 0.417], ["2017-10-02", 0.419], ["2017-10-02", 0.414], ["2017-10-02", 0.417], ["2017-10-02", 0.415], ["2017-10-02", 0.419], ["2017-10-03", 0.419], ["2017-10-03", 0.412], ["2017-10-03", 0.413], ["2017-10-03", 0.411], ["2017-10-04", 0.411], ["2017-10-04", 0.396], ["2017-10-04", 0.402], ["2017-10-05", 0.402], ["2017-10-06", 0.406], ["2017-10-07", 0.402], ["2017-10-07", 0.404], ["2017-10-08", 0.402], ["2017-10-08", 0.402], ["2017-10-08", 0.402], ["2017-10-09", 0.404], ["2017-10-09", 0.404], ["2017-10-09", 0.399], ["2017-10-09", 0.399], ["2017-10-09", 0.396], ["2017-10-09", 0.395], ["2017-10-10", 0.395], ["2017-10-10", 0.398], ["2017-10-11", 0.397], ["2017-10-11", 0.397], ["2017-10-11", 0.397], ["2017-10-12", 0.399], ["2017-10-12", 0.399], ["2017-10-12", 0.398], ["2017-10-12", 0.398], ["2017-10-12", 0.395], ["2017-10-12", 0.394], ["2017-10-13", 0.392], ["2017-10-13", 0.392], ["2017-10-14", 0.391], ["2017-10-14", 0.387], ["2017-10-14", 0.388], ["2017-10-14", 0.386], ["2017-10-15", 0.386], ["2017-10-15", 0.383], ["2017-10-15", 0.389]] | https://www.metaculus.com/api2/questions/564/ | Not applicable/available for this question. | Science & Tech | Since mining cryptocurrency can essentially convert CPU/GPU time into money, and browsers will tend to run whatever javascript programs are handed to them, there is the possibility of sites using visitors' computers to mine cryptocurrency.
In two recent incidents, the Pirate Bay was revealed to be mining bitcoin in lieu of ads, and Showtime's site was found to be mining Monero coins (probably not with the company's knowledge.)
Will there be another media-reported incident in which a website is revealed to be surreptitiously mining cryptocoins?
Resolution is positive if by Nov. 15 a credible media story or other report points to an event in which a website is found to have been mining cryptocurrency with no onsite indication that it is doing so. Website must register at rank < 2000 on Alexa's rankings (chosen to include PirateBay and Showtime.) | true | 2017-10-15 | Will another significant website be outed for on-the-sly in-browser cryptocoin mining By Nov. 15? | metaculus | 0 |
2017-10-03 | 2017-09-28 | [] | binary | [["2017-09-28", 0.3], ["2017-09-28", 0.25], ["2017-09-28", 0.282], ["2017-09-28", 0.326], ["2017-09-28", 0.326], ["2017-09-28", 0.317], ["2017-09-28", 0.329], ["2017-09-28", 0.329], ["2017-09-28", 0.312], ["2017-09-28", 0.311], ["2017-09-29", 0.311], ["2017-09-29", 0.342], ["2017-09-29", 0.342], ["2017-09-29", 0.367], ["2017-09-29", 0.376], ["2017-09-29", 0.368], ["2017-09-29", 0.368], ["2017-09-29", 0.371], ["2017-09-29", 0.384], ["2017-09-29", 0.378], ["2017-09-30", 0.387], ["2017-09-30", 0.387], ["2017-09-30", 0.385], ["2017-09-30", 0.396], ["2017-09-30", 0.398], ["2017-09-30", 0.398], ["2017-09-30", 0.401], ["2017-10-01", 0.395], ["2017-10-01", 0.399], ["2017-10-01", 0.4], ["2017-10-01", 0.403], ["2017-10-01", 0.403], ["2017-10-01", 0.403], ["2017-10-01", 0.4], ["2017-10-01", 0.4], ["2017-10-02", 0.4], ["2017-10-02", 0.409], ["2017-10-02", 0.408], ["2017-10-02", 0.409], ["2017-10-02", 0.409], ["2017-10-02", 0.411], ["2017-10-02", 0.411], ["2017-10-02", 0.411], ["2017-10-02", 0.415], ["2017-10-02", 0.415], ["2017-10-02", 0.417], ["2017-10-02", 0.414], ["2017-10-02", 0.414], ["2017-10-02", 0.414], ["2017-10-02", 0.412], ["2017-10-02", 0.436], ["2017-10-02", 0.436], ["2017-10-02", 0.436], ["2017-10-03", 0.444], ["2017-10-03", 0.444], ["2017-10-03", 0.447], ["2017-10-03", 0.446]] | https://www.metaculus.com/api2/questions/565/ | Not applicable/available for this question. | Science & Tech | It's been a big couple of years for gravitational waves, with their first direct discovery announced by LIGO in February 2016, and a host of nice followup results. Most (and very) recently, a detection of merging black holes using LIGO plus Virgo. There's also lots of speculation (and predictions here) that soon a neutron-star – neutron-star merger detection will be announced.
As the detections seem firm and appear to have withstood scrutiny, talk of a Nobel prize has begun. The discovery is clearly prize-worthy, but how about the timing?
Will the 2017 Nobel Prize in Physics be awarded for the discovery of gravitational waves using the LIGO instrument?
No requirement is places on which individuals are named, just on the cited discovery. | true | 2017-10-03 | 2017 Physics Nobel Prize in Physics for Gravitational Waves? | metaculus | 1 |
2018-11-13 | 2017-09-30 | [] | binary | [["2017-10-15", 0.1], ["2017-10-15", 0.1], ["2017-10-15", 0.07], ["2017-10-15", 0.157], ["2017-10-15", 0.258], ["2017-10-15", 0.258], ["2017-10-15", 0.258], ["2017-10-15", 0.277], ["2017-10-16", 0.266], ["2017-10-16", 0.266], ["2017-10-16", 0.282], ["2017-10-16", 0.282], ["2017-10-16", 0.267], ["2017-10-16", 0.257], ["2017-10-16", 0.267], ["2017-10-16", 0.256], ["2017-10-16", 0.256], ["2017-10-16", 0.249], ["2017-10-16", 0.235], ["2017-10-17", 0.24], ["2017-10-17", 0.24], ["2017-10-17", 0.232], ["2017-10-17", 0.232], ["2017-10-17", 0.222], ["2017-10-17", 0.241], ["2017-10-17", 0.241], ["2017-10-18", 0.285], ["2017-10-18", 0.283], ["2017-10-18", 0.292], ["2017-10-18", 0.309], ["2017-10-18", 0.306], ["2017-10-19", 0.306], ["2017-10-20", 0.306], ["2017-10-20", 0.306], ["2017-10-20", 0.315], ["2017-10-21", 0.315], ["2017-10-22", 0.32], ["2017-10-22", 0.325], ["2017-10-22", 0.325], ["2017-10-23", 0.326], ["2017-10-23", 0.326], ["2017-10-23", 0.326], ["2017-10-24", 0.325], ["2017-10-25", 0.323], ["2017-10-25", 0.324], ["2017-10-25", 0.324], ["2017-10-26", 0.327], ["2017-10-26", 0.338], ["2017-10-28", 0.335], ["2017-10-28", 0.335], ["2017-10-28", 0.338], ["2017-10-29", 0.339], ["2017-10-29", 0.342], ["2017-10-30", 0.342], ["2017-10-31", 0.352], ["2017-10-31", 0.361], ["2017-10-31", 0.361], ["2017-10-31", 0.358], ["2017-11-01", 0.365], ["2017-11-01", 0.365]] | https://www.metaculus.com/api2/questions/567/ | Not applicable/available for this question. | Economics & Business | Amazon recently announced plans to build "HQ2", a second headquarters in North America. As detailed in a number of news articles, cities across the continent are scrambling to promote themselves as the ideal location; the selected region will absorb a $5 billion investment and see the creation of up to 50,000 new jobs over the next two decades. It is widely expected that the winning locale will offer significant tax incentives, but a range of tangible and intangible factors will likely play into the final selection.
A recent article profiles the, ahem, ingratiation efforts that a number of small cities have been putting forth to become the hosts. Will extra efforts by relatively small cities win out over the resources available to larger cities? We'll ask:
Will the new Amazon HQ be hosted by a city with a population of < 3,000,000 people in its metropolitan area?
Resolution is positive if the official Amazon announcement places the HQ in a city of population of < 3M in its metropolitan area, per the wikipedia list of 2016 census estimates. (This excluded the largest 18 cities).
(Edit 10/15 to change to metro areas and 3M population, 18 cities above the line.) | true | 2017-11-01 | Where will Amazon locate its second headquarters? | metaculus | 0 |
2022-10-02 | 2017-10-02 | [] | binary | [["2017-10-05", 0.37], ["2017-10-09", 0.292], ["2017-10-11", 0.299], ["2017-10-15", 0.277], ["2017-10-18", 0.284], ["2017-10-23", 0.284], ["2017-10-26", 0.277], ["2017-10-29", 0.311], ["2017-10-31", 0.299], ["2017-11-04", 0.292], ["2017-11-06", 0.283], ["2017-11-09", 0.274], ["2017-11-13", 0.274], ["2017-11-15", 0.274], ["2017-11-19", 0.27], ["2017-11-30", 0.265], ["2017-12-01", 0.265], ["2017-12-05", 0.265], ["2017-12-06", 0.263], ["2017-12-16", 0.258], ["2017-12-18", 0.251], ["2017-12-21", 0.25], ["2017-12-26", 0.247], ["2017-12-29", 0.248], ["2018-01-04", 0.249], ["2018-01-09", 0.249], ["2018-01-11", 0.25], ["2018-01-14", 0.25], ["2018-01-18", 0.244], ["2018-02-06", 0.243], ["2018-02-12", 0.243], ["2018-02-22", 0.242], ["2018-03-08", 0.243], ["2018-03-10", 0.241], ["2018-03-12", 0.246], ["2018-03-17", 0.244], ["2018-03-21", 0.242], ["2018-03-24", 0.24], ["2018-03-26", 0.243], ["2018-03-29", 0.245], ["2018-04-02", 0.243], ["2018-04-06", 0.24], ["2018-04-10", 0.239], ["2018-04-13", 0.238], ["2018-04-15", 0.236], ["2018-04-19", 0.235], ["2018-04-21", 0.235], ["2018-04-25", 0.232], ["2018-04-29", 0.231], ["2018-04-30", 0.231], ["2018-05-04", 0.23], ["2018-05-06", 0.228], ["2018-05-08", 0.227], ["2018-05-11", 0.22], ["2018-05-15", 0.222], ["2018-05-17", 0.22], ["2018-05-21", 0.22], ["2018-05-24", 0.22], ["2018-05-27", 0.219], ["2018-05-30", 0.217], ["2018-06-01", 0.218], ["2018-06-04", 0.219], ["2018-06-06", 0.215], ["2018-06-08", 0.216], ["2018-06-12", 0.214], ["2018-06-14", 0.213], ["2018-06-16", 0.213], ["2018-06-19", 0.213], ["2018-06-21", 0.21], ["2018-06-24", 0.206], ["2018-06-30", 0.205], ["2018-07-02", 0.204], ["2018-07-06", 0.203], ["2018-07-09", 0.202], ["2018-07-11", 0.2], ["2018-07-15", 0.204], ["2018-07-16", 0.203], ["2018-07-19", 0.2], ["2018-07-20", 0.2], ["2018-07-23", 0.198], ["2018-07-26", 0.196], ["2018-07-31", 0.194], ["2018-08-02", 0.196], ["2018-08-06", 0.195], ["2018-08-10", 0.194], ["2018-08-13", 0.195], ["2018-08-16", 0.195], ["2018-08-19", 0.195], ["2018-08-23", 0.194], ["2018-08-26", 0.194], ["2018-09-01", 0.193], ["2018-09-04", 0.19], ["2018-09-07", 0.188], ["2018-09-10", 0.184], ["2018-09-13", 0.184], ["2018-09-17", 0.181], ["2018-09-18", 0.18], ["2018-09-22", 0.18], ["2018-09-25", 0.178], ["2018-09-29", 0.177], ["2018-09-30", 0.164]] | https://www.metaculus.com/api2/questions/568/ | Not applicable/available for this question. | Politics & Governance | The 1st of October 2017 saw a contentious (and according to the Spanish government, illegal) referendum on Catalan independence.
News reports suggest that with a 43% turnout around 90% of ballots went for independence, amid widespread police crackdowns on voting, and confiscations of ballot boxes.
With talk of a unilateral declaration of independence in the air, the political future of Catalonia is unclear.
This question asks:
By 2022-10-01, Will Catalonia become an independent state?
Question resolves positive if Catalonia becomes an independent state by the 1st of October 2022.
Resolution can be determined by de facto control over a large majority of the area currently making up the autonomous region of Catalonia within Spain, determined by, for example, the issuing of passports, control over borders, independent police and military. | true | 2018-09-30 | By 2022-10-01, Will Catalonia become an independent state? | metaculus | 0 |
2022-03-21 | 2017-10-04 | [] | binary | [["2017-10-17", 0.2], ["2017-10-23", 0.246], ["2017-10-29", 0.246], ["2017-11-03", 0.262], ["2017-11-09", 0.261], ["2017-11-19", 0.258], ["2017-12-07", 0.251], ["2017-12-12", 0.245], ["2018-01-09", 0.245], ["2018-01-10", 0.265], ["2018-01-18", 0.265], ["2018-03-03", 0.258], ["2018-03-08", 0.258], ["2018-03-12", 0.243], ["2018-03-16", 0.239], ["2018-03-24", 0.239], ["2018-03-28", 0.252], ["2018-04-05", 0.253], ["2018-04-07", 0.258], ["2018-04-15", 0.258], ["2018-04-19", 0.256], ["2018-05-05", 0.251], ["2018-05-09", 0.254], ["2018-05-12", 0.252], ["2018-05-17", 0.255], ["2018-05-20", 0.246], ["2018-05-23", 0.243], ["2018-05-27", 0.239], ["2018-05-30", 0.24], ["2018-06-03", 0.24], ["2018-06-08", 0.238], ["2018-06-12", 0.237], ["2018-06-18", 0.237], ["2018-06-24", 0.237], ["2018-06-29", 0.245], ["2018-07-06", 0.243], ["2018-07-14", 0.24], ["2018-07-20", 0.236], ["2018-07-24", 0.236], ["2018-07-27", 0.236], ["2018-08-01", 0.234], ["2018-08-06", 0.238], ["2018-08-10", 0.238], ["2018-08-16", 0.244], ["2018-08-29", 0.244], ["2018-09-03", 0.245], ["2018-09-06", 0.245], ["2018-09-10", 0.243], ["2018-09-14", 0.243], ["2018-09-20", 0.241], ["2018-09-25", 0.24], ["2018-10-01", 0.248], ["2018-10-09", 0.249], ["2018-10-09", 0.249], ["2018-10-15", 0.249], ["2018-10-19", 0.248], ["2018-10-30", 0.25], ["2018-11-02", 0.252], ["2018-11-10", 0.252], ["2018-11-16", 0.252], ["2018-11-18", 0.251], ["2018-12-21", 0.249], ["2018-12-27", 0.249], ["2018-12-31", 0.251], ["2019-01-06", 0.249], ["2019-01-15", 0.249], ["2019-01-16", 0.248], ["2019-02-01", 0.248], ["2019-02-09", 0.247], ["2019-02-22", 0.247], ["2019-02-22", 0.247], ["2019-03-21", 0.247], ["2019-03-25", 0.246], ["2019-04-14", 0.246], ["2019-04-25", 0.246], ["2019-04-25", 0.246], ["2019-05-14", 0.245], ["2019-05-18", 0.244], ["2019-07-09", 0.244], ["2019-08-01", 0.249], ["2019-08-07", 0.249], ["2019-08-12", 0.248], ["2019-08-17", 0.247], ["2019-08-22", 0.247], ["2019-09-05", 0.248], ["2019-09-09", 0.248], ["2019-09-20", 0.25], ["2019-09-29", 0.248], ["2019-10-05", 0.246], ["2019-10-22", 0.245], ["2019-10-27", 0.245], ["2019-11-05", 0.246], ["2019-11-16", 0.246], ["2019-11-19", 0.246], ["2019-11-30", 0.245], ["2019-12-02", 0.245], ["2019-12-16", 0.246], ["2019-12-19", 0.244], ["2019-12-24", 0.243], ["2019-12-31", 0.231], ["2019-12-31", 0.229]] | https://www.metaculus.com/api2/questions/569/ | Not applicable/available for this question. | Environment & Energy | When a massive solar storm hit the earth in 1859, it produced auroras bright enough to wake Colorado miners and threw sparks off of telegraph wires. Were such a storm to strike today, however, the consequences to our technology-dependent society would be catastrophic. Such storms are the subject of several other questions, particularly this question regarding the frequency of such storms and this one regarding the construction of a satellite warning system.
Two Harvard University professors, Manasvi Lingam and Abraham Loeb, recently estimate the losses at $10 trillion, with a years-long recovery. In contrast to that cost, which is approximately 50 times the cost of NASA's initial efforts to send humans to the moon. Given estimates upward of 1%/year of such a flare, this sort of prospective loss arguably calls for significant spending at risk mitigation.
Beyond warnings or damage minimization, the above paper proposes a somewhat more radical astronomical protection plan. A loop of copper wire with a diameter similar to the Earth's, they say, powered by one terawatt, could create a sufficient magnetic field so as to deflect the energy of a solar storm enough to protect the planet's technology. Placed at the Lagrange point L1, the loop would cost about $100 billion to construct, Lingam and Loeb estimate. (As a fun side-beneit, they investigate how we might look for signs of such shields built by other civilizations out there.)
Will anyone take this idea seriously? We'll ask the following:
By 2021, will a chunk of more than $100,000 USD be spent in pursuit of this idea?
This question will resolve positively given a credible report that a grant, contract, budget line, or some similar allocation of funding equalling $100K or more has been made toward further study of, or designs for, an in-orbit Earth protecting magnetic deflection system. Effective cost of researcher or faculty time does not count, and the description of the allocation must somewhere directly reference Lingam and Loeb. | true | 2019-12-31 | Funds toward a Solar storm shield begun by 2021? | metaculus | 0 |
2023-01-01 | 2017-10-09 | ["https://www.usgs.gov/programs/earthquake-hazards/earthquakes", "https://twitter.com/szendehnam/status/1604079759373111296"] | binary | [["2017-11-21", 0.435], ["2017-12-02", 0.501], ["2017-12-09", 0.497], ["2017-12-31", 0.498], ["2018-01-10", 0.516], ["2018-02-05", 0.516], ["2018-02-07", 0.51], ["2018-02-25", 0.51], ["2018-03-10", 0.509], ["2018-03-17", 0.514], ["2018-03-30", 0.514], ["2018-04-06", 0.523], ["2018-04-14", 0.523], ["2018-04-23", 0.517], ["2018-04-29", 0.517], ["2018-05-11", 0.517], ["2018-05-20", 0.519], ["2018-06-01", 0.51], ["2018-06-11", 0.506], ["2018-06-19", 0.505], ["2018-06-26", 0.51], ["2018-07-04", 0.51], ["2018-07-16", 0.5], ["2018-07-23", 0.498], ["2018-08-03", 0.498], ["2018-08-11", 0.498], ["2018-08-19", 0.506], ["2018-08-27", 0.506], ["2018-09-07", 0.506], ["2018-09-17", 0.502], ["2018-09-30", 0.5], ["2018-10-13", 0.5], ["2018-10-26", 0.499], ["2018-11-08", 0.498], ["2018-11-17", 0.498], ["2018-12-01", 0.5], ["2018-12-10", 0.495], ["2019-01-02", 0.495], ["2019-01-08", 0.494], ["2019-01-18", 0.493], ["2019-01-25", 0.495], ["2019-03-07", 0.495], ["2019-04-13", 0.495], ["2019-04-17", 0.471], ["2019-05-18", 0.47], ["2019-05-18", 0.469], ["2019-07-01", 0.469], ["2019-07-11", 0.47], ["2019-07-20", 0.467], ["2019-07-25", 0.466], ["2019-08-16", 0.466], ["2019-08-26", 0.466], ["2019-09-01", 0.466], ["2019-09-17", 0.466], ["2019-09-22", 0.466], ["2019-11-23", 0.464], ["2019-12-31", 0.464], ["2020-01-13", 0.459], ["2020-01-23", 0.459], ["2020-02-04", 0.46], ["2020-02-17", 0.457], ["2020-03-01", 0.457], ["2020-03-11", 0.451], ["2020-03-23", 0.451], ["2020-03-31", 0.45], ["2020-04-09", 0.449], ["2020-04-24", 0.448], ["2020-05-09", 0.448], ["2020-06-01", 0.447], ["2020-06-04", 0.446], ["2020-06-19", 0.446], ["2020-07-01", 0.446], ["2020-07-09", 0.446], ["2020-07-21", 0.446], ["2020-07-30", 0.437], ["2020-08-11", 0.438], ["2020-08-20", 0.436], ["2020-08-31", 0.436], ["2020-09-11", 0.436], ["2020-09-25", 0.436], ["2020-10-01", 0.436], ["2020-10-09", 0.435], ["2020-10-17", 0.434], ["2020-10-27", 0.433], ["2020-11-05", 0.433], ["2020-11-13", 0.43], ["2020-11-24", 0.429], ["2020-12-04", 0.429], ["2020-12-10", 0.428], ["2020-12-20", 0.427], ["2020-12-25", 0.427], ["2021-01-04", 0.427], ["2021-01-13", 0.426], ["2021-01-26", 0.426], ["2021-02-06", 0.416], ["2021-02-19", 0.413], ["2021-03-04", 0.395], ["2021-03-16", 0.392], ["2021-03-30", 0.39], ["2021-04-12", 0.366], ["2021-04-15", 0.353]] | https://www.metaculus.com/api2/questions/570/ | Not applicable/available for this question. | Environment & Energy | The major earthquakes in Mexico in early September 2017 reminded the United States of its own vulnerability to earthquakes. Nearly all of the West Coast of the United States lies in the zone of highest seismic hazard, with other earthquake hotspots in Hawaii, Alaska, South Carolina, the Intermountain West, and the New Madrid region on the Missouri-Tennessee border.
The San Andreas fault, which runs much of the length of California, is of significant concern due to the concentration of people in vulnerable regions. 2008 estimates of the damage caused by "The Big One," with an estimated magnitude of 7.8, reached $200B in damage and 1,800 lives lost. Seismic zones along Utah's Wasatch Front and the New Madrid zone in the southeast would produce similarly catastrophically damaging major quakes.
23 earthquakes of magnitude 7 or above have hit the United States in the past 200 years. Some of those, like the 1906 San Francisco earthquake, caused major loss of life and property. Some, like the 2016 Old Iliamna earthquake in Alaska, caused property damage, but no fatalities. The question is not whether another major earthquake will strike soon, but where and how damaging.
Will a major United States earthquake strike by end of 2022?
This question will resolve as positive if an earthquake with a magnitude of at least 7.0 on the moment magnitude scale, with an epicenter within the borders of the United States and estimated damage of $10 billion or more, occurs on or before December 31, 2022. Damage estimates need not be completed before the target resolution date. | true | 2021-04-15 | A major United States earthquake by 2023? | metaculus | 0 |
2018-10-05 | 2017-10-17 | [] | binary | [["2017-10-22", 0.09], ["2017-10-22", 0.09], ["2017-10-22", 0.277], ["2017-10-22", 0.268], ["2017-10-22", 0.268], ["2017-10-22", 0.228], ["2017-10-22", 0.228], ["2017-10-22", 0.215], ["2017-10-22", 0.215], ["2017-10-22", 0.224], ["2017-10-22", 0.227], ["2017-10-22", 0.225], ["2017-10-22", 0.225], ["2017-10-22", 0.228], ["2017-10-23", 0.242], ["2017-10-23", 0.253], ["2017-10-23", 0.263], ["2017-10-23", 0.259], ["2017-10-23", 0.259], ["2017-10-24", 0.261], ["2017-10-25", 0.268], ["2017-10-25", 0.271], ["2017-10-25", 0.271], ["2017-10-27", 0.269], ["2017-10-27", 0.268], ["2017-10-28", 0.268], ["2017-10-29", 0.262], ["2017-10-29", 0.262], ["2017-10-30", 0.267], ["2017-10-30", 0.261], ["2017-10-31", 0.264], ["2017-11-02", 0.255], ["2017-11-03", 0.255], ["2017-11-03", 0.248], ["2017-11-03", 0.25], ["2017-11-03", 0.25], ["2017-11-03", 0.248], ["2017-11-03", 0.245], ["2017-11-03", 0.245], ["2017-11-03", 0.244], ["2017-11-03", 0.241], ["2017-11-03", 0.239], ["2017-11-04", 0.24], ["2017-11-04", 0.238], ["2017-11-04", 0.238], ["2017-11-04", 0.233], ["2017-11-04", 0.231], ["2017-11-05", 0.231], ["2017-11-06", 0.231], ["2017-11-06", 0.236], ["2017-11-09", 0.234], ["2017-11-09", 0.234], ["2017-11-17", 0.233], ["2017-11-20", 0.238], ["2017-11-29", 0.241], ["2017-12-06", 0.245], ["2017-12-07", 0.243], ["2017-12-08", 0.242], ["2017-12-20", 0.242], ["2017-12-21", 0.251], ["2017-12-22", 0.253], ["2017-12-22", 0.253], ["2017-12-22", 0.253], ["2017-12-26", 0.255], ["2017-12-28", 0.255], ["2017-12-30", 0.257], ["2017-12-31", 0.257], ["2017-12-31", 0.259], ["2017-12-31", 0.265], ["2017-12-31", 0.261]] | https://www.metaculus.com/api2/questions/572/ | Not applicable/available for this question. | Science & Tech | Since September 2016, Chinese space officials have known that their space station, Tiangong 1, was going to crash into earth, its orbit not-so-slowly decaying. The station, which has been in orbit since 2011, could burn up in the Earth's atmosphere any time between now and April 2018. The time and location of the station's return to Earth is unknown.
It's also unknown how much material will survive re-entry and will land somewhere on Earth. When possible, space agencies direct re-entering spacecraft to an oceanic "graveyard" where they can splash down safely. But because Tiangong 1's re-entry is uncontrolled, it's possible that chunks weighing up to 200 pounds could land anywhere on Earth. With around 29% of the planet's surface as land, chances are small (though non-zero) that a sizable piece of debris could cause damage in inhabited areas.
Will significant pieces of Tiangong 1 touch down on land?
This question will resolve as positive if, following the confirmed atmospheric destruction of the Tiangong 1 space station and prior to June 1, 2019, a piece of debris confirmed to belong to the station and massing > 1 kg is found as having impacted originally on land, according to credible news or governmental reports.
(Edit 11/3/17 to add cutoff date for finding the piece.) | true | 2018-01-01 | Will (some of) China's space station land on land? | metaculus | 0 |
2017-12-01 | 2017-10-26 | [] | binary | [["2017-10-26", 0.25], ["2017-10-26", 0.185], ["2017-10-26", 0.14], ["2017-10-26", 0.14], ["2017-10-27", 0.108], ["2017-10-27", 0.136], ["2017-10-27", 0.136], ["2017-10-27", 0.122], ["2017-10-27", 0.122], ["2017-10-27", 0.106], ["2017-10-27", 0.096], ["2017-10-27", 0.102], ["2017-10-27", 0.102], ["2017-10-27", 0.101], ["2017-10-27", 0.109], ["2017-10-27", 0.119], ["2017-10-27", 0.119], ["2017-10-27", 0.114], ["2017-10-27", 0.114], ["2017-10-27", 0.121], ["2017-10-27", 0.129], ["2017-10-27", 0.129], ["2017-10-27", 0.13], ["2017-10-27", 0.13], ["2017-10-27", 0.123], ["2017-10-27", 0.117], ["2017-10-27", 0.122], ["2017-10-28", 0.122], ["2017-10-28", 0.121], ["2017-10-28", 0.125], ["2017-10-28", 0.124], ["2017-10-28", 0.127], ["2017-10-28", 0.118], ["2017-10-28", 0.118], ["2017-10-29", 0.115], ["2017-10-29", 0.111], ["2017-10-29", 0.108], ["2017-10-30", 0.108], ["2017-10-30", 0.106], ["2017-10-30", 0.109], ["2017-10-30", 0.109], ["2017-10-30", 0.11], ["2017-10-30", 0.11], ["2017-10-30", 0.112], ["2017-10-30", 0.118], ["2017-10-31", 0.118], ["2017-10-31", 0.114], ["2017-10-31", 0.114], ["2017-10-31", 0.115], ["2017-11-01", 0.115], ["2017-11-02", 0.113], ["2017-11-02", 0.113], ["2017-11-02", 0.109], ["2017-11-02", 0.109], ["2017-11-02", 0.107], ["2017-11-02", 0.107], ["2017-11-02", 0.106], ["2017-11-02", 0.111], ["2017-11-02", 0.109], ["2017-11-03", 0.109], ["2017-11-03", 0.108], ["2017-11-03", 0.106], ["2017-11-03", 0.111], ["2017-11-03", 0.116], ["2017-11-03", 0.116], ["2017-11-03", 0.12], ["2017-11-05", 0.119], ["2017-11-05", 0.119], ["2017-11-05", 0.121], ["2017-11-05", 0.128], ["2017-11-06", 0.125], ["2017-11-06", 0.123], ["2017-11-07", 0.122], ["2017-11-07", 0.12], ["2017-11-07", 0.12], ["2017-11-07", 0.12], ["2017-11-08", 0.116], ["2017-11-08", 0.116], ["2017-11-09", 0.114], ["2017-11-10", 0.113], ["2017-11-11", 0.113], ["2017-11-11", 0.113], ["2017-11-12", 0.115], ["2017-11-13", 0.115], ["2017-11-13", 0.117], ["2017-11-14", 0.115], ["2017-11-14", 0.118], ["2017-11-14", 0.118], ["2017-11-14", 0.118], ["2017-11-14", 0.117]] | https://www.metaculus.com/api2/questions/576/ | Not applicable/available for this question. | Economics & Business | Rumors are swirling that Amazon might start to accept Bitcoin payments. This would be a huge shift in the cryptocurrency world.
We ask:
By Dec. 1, will it either be possible to make purchases on Amazon, of at least some goods or services, using Bitcoin, OR will there be a firm date announced by Amazon prior to Jan. 1, 2018 when this will be possible?
Resolution is positive if by credible media report (or direct access) at least some non-Amazon-affiliate users can use Bitcoin to make purchases prior to Dec. 1 OR if an official announcement by Amazon declares that Bitcoin purchases will be possible on by a specific named date that itself is prior to Jan 1, 2018. | true | 2017-11-15 | Amazon to accept, or set a date to accept, Bitcoin payment by Dec. 1? | metaculus | 0 |
2018-04-17 | 2017-11-12 | [] | binary | [["2017-11-14", 0.13], ["2017-11-14", 0.228], ["2017-11-14", 0.253], ["2017-11-15", 0.252], ["2017-11-15", 0.252], ["2017-11-15", 0.232], ["2017-11-15", 0.235], ["2017-11-15", 0.235], ["2017-11-16", 0.254], ["2017-11-16", 0.244], ["2017-11-16", 0.244], ["2017-11-16", 0.26], ["2017-11-17", 0.279], ["2017-11-18", 0.279], ["2017-11-18", 0.262], ["2017-11-18", 0.268], ["2017-11-19", 0.276], ["2017-11-19", 0.271], ["2017-11-19", 0.274], ["2017-11-19", 0.274], ["2017-11-20", 0.271], ["2017-11-21", 0.271], ["2017-11-23", 0.275], ["2017-11-24", 0.296], ["2017-11-25", 0.3], ["2017-11-26", 0.296], ["2017-11-26", 0.296], ["2017-11-26", 0.302], ["2017-11-27", 0.302], ["2017-11-28", 0.312], ["2017-12-01", 0.313], ["2017-12-01", 0.317], ["2017-12-01", 0.35], ["2017-12-02", 0.36], ["2017-12-02", 0.378], ["2017-12-02", 0.386], ["2017-12-02", 0.389], ["2017-12-02", 0.386], ["2017-12-03", 0.395], ["2017-12-03", 0.396], ["2017-12-03", 0.396], ["2017-12-04", 0.402], ["2017-12-04", 0.398], ["2017-12-05", 0.401], ["2017-12-05", 0.404], ["2017-12-06", 0.403], ["2017-12-07", 0.39], ["2017-12-08", 0.386], ["2017-12-09", 0.389], ["2017-12-11", 0.39], ["2017-12-11", 0.383], ["2017-12-12", 0.383], ["2017-12-13", 0.38], ["2017-12-14", 0.375], ["2017-12-14", 0.369], ["2017-12-17", 0.369], ["2017-12-17", 0.369], ["2017-12-22", 0.36], ["2017-12-24", 0.367], ["2017-12-24", 0.367], ["2017-12-24", 0.366], ["2017-12-25", 0.365], ["2017-12-26", 0.365], ["2017-12-27", 0.365], ["2017-12-28", 0.363], ["2017-12-29", 0.36], ["2018-01-01", 0.352], ["2018-01-01", 0.352], ["2018-01-03", 0.348], ["2018-01-03", 0.353], ["2018-01-03", 0.354], ["2018-01-04", 0.354], ["2018-01-04", 0.354], ["2018-01-04", 0.347], ["2018-01-04", 0.35], ["2018-01-04", 0.351], ["2018-01-05", 0.351], ["2018-01-05", 0.35], ["2018-01-05", 0.351], ["2018-01-07", 0.349], ["2018-01-07", 0.355], ["2018-01-08", 0.352], ["2018-01-08", 0.35], ["2018-01-09", 0.35], ["2018-01-09", 0.345], ["2018-01-09", 0.345], ["2018-01-09", 0.337], ["2018-01-10", 0.337], ["2018-01-10", 0.339], ["2018-01-10", 0.338], ["2018-01-10", 0.338], ["2018-01-11", 0.337], ["2018-01-11", 0.337], ["2018-01-11", 0.337], ["2018-01-12", 0.338], ["2018-01-12", 0.333], ["2018-01-13", 0.333], ["2018-01-14", 0.33], ["2018-01-14", 0.328], ["2018-01-14", 0.326], ["2018-01-15", 0.326]] | https://www.metaculus.com/api2/questions/580/ | Not applicable/available for this question. | Politics & Governance | The investigation by CIA lead Robert Mueller heated up dramatically with the charging of Paul Manafort. It's hard – but interesting – to try to predict where the investigation will go next. There has been much discussion of Michael Flynn, with one report that Mueller has in-hand enough evidence to charge him, but has not yet done so.
Meanwhile, some discussion has turned to Jared Kushner. Per a CNN article,
Mueller's investigators have expressed interest in Kushner, President Donald Trump's son-in-law and a White House senior adviser, as part of its probe into Russian meddling, including potential obstruction of justice in Comey's firing, sources familiar with the matter said.
however,
Sources close to the White House say that based on their knowledge, Kushner is not a target of the investigation.
Will Jared Kushner be charged with a crime prior to Tax Day 2018 (April 17)?
As for other questions in this series, resolution is positive if credible media report indicates that Kushner has been formally charged prior to April 17, 2018 | true | 2018-01-15 | Will Jared Kushner be charged with a crime by Tax Day 2018? | metaculus | 0 |
2019-01-01 | 2017-11-12 | [] | binary | [["2017-11-17", 0.4], ["2017-11-17", 0.4], ["2017-11-17", 0.523], ["2017-11-17", 0.597], ["2017-11-17", 0.59], ["2017-11-17", 0.535], ["2017-11-17", 0.533], ["2017-11-17", 0.533], ["2017-11-17", 0.535], ["2017-11-17", 0.539], ["2017-11-18", 0.539], ["2017-11-18", 0.554], ["2017-11-18", 0.555], ["2017-11-18", 0.555], ["2017-11-18", 0.554], ["2017-11-18", 0.563], ["2017-11-18", 0.563], ["2017-11-18", 0.578], ["2017-11-18", 0.578], ["2017-11-18", 0.57], ["2017-11-19", 0.567], ["2017-11-19", 0.569], ["2017-11-19", 0.58], ["2017-11-19", 0.58], ["2017-11-19", 0.589], ["2017-11-19", 0.598], ["2017-11-19", 0.598], ["2017-11-20", 0.598], ["2017-11-20", 0.592], ["2017-11-20", 0.568], ["2017-11-20", 0.568], ["2017-11-20", 0.574], ["2017-11-20", 0.578], ["2017-11-20", 0.59], ["2017-11-20", 0.59], ["2017-11-21", 0.589], ["2017-11-21", 0.587], ["2017-11-21", 0.593], ["2017-11-22", 0.589], ["2017-11-22", 0.59], ["2017-11-22", 0.59], ["2017-11-22", 0.591], ["2017-11-23", 0.586], ["2017-11-24", 0.586], ["2017-11-24", 0.589], ["2017-11-24", 0.592], ["2017-11-24", 0.592], ["2017-11-25", 0.596], ["2017-11-25", 0.596], ["2017-11-25", 0.596], ["2017-11-25", 0.595], ["2017-11-25", 0.593], ["2017-11-25", 0.591], ["2017-11-26", 0.587], ["2017-11-26", 0.59], ["2017-11-26", 0.59], ["2017-11-27", 0.59], ["2017-11-28", 0.592], ["2017-11-29", 0.592], ["2017-11-30", 0.591], ["2017-12-01", 0.591], ["2017-12-02", 0.593], ["2017-12-04", 0.593], ["2017-12-04", 0.592], ["2017-12-05", 0.596], ["2017-12-08", 0.596], ["2017-12-11", 0.582], ["2017-12-12", 0.583], ["2017-12-12", 0.583], ["2017-12-13", 0.589], ["2017-12-13", 0.589], ["2017-12-13", 0.588], ["2017-12-14", 0.588], ["2017-12-18", 0.588], ["2017-12-19", 0.587], ["2017-12-20", 0.583], ["2017-12-20", 0.58], ["2017-12-21", 0.58], ["2017-12-21", 0.582], ["2017-12-21", 0.575], ["2017-12-21", 0.581], ["2017-12-21", 0.583], ["2017-12-21", 0.576], ["2017-12-22", 0.577], ["2017-12-22", 0.577], ["2017-12-22", 0.583], ["2017-12-23", 0.583], ["2017-12-25", 0.582], ["2017-12-25", 0.582], ["2017-12-26", 0.582], ["2017-12-26", 0.58], ["2017-12-26", 0.58], ["2017-12-27", 0.583], ["2017-12-29", 0.583], ["2017-12-30", 0.583], ["2017-12-30", 0.583], ["2017-12-30", 0.585], ["2017-12-30", 0.585], ["2017-12-31", 0.585], ["2017-12-31", 0.585], ["2017-12-31", 0.587]] | https://www.metaculus.com/api2/questions/581/ | Not applicable/available for this question. | Healthcare & Biology | Interest in Veganism has increased substantially in recent years, but it is unclear whether the current wave of Veganism will become the movement that will make eating animal products a thing of the past or just turn out to be another fad.
We can use Google trends to analyze the interest in a topic over time. We are going to use the trend in interest in the Topic of Veganism for this question. (Be careful to differentiate between the 'Topic' and 'Search Term', as Google makes a distinction between the two.)
In order to get a question that resolves in the not all to distant future, it is asked:
Will the month with the highest interest in Veganism in 2018 have a interest at least 25% greater than that of the month with the highest interest in 2017?
The question resolves positive, if the highest peak (a datapoint represents the average interest over a month) before 2018 (note that this could be November or December 2017) on the 2004 - present graph gets reduced to a value of 80 or less (100/80=1.25) by a month (peak) with complete data in 2018.
The earliest possible resolution time should be 2018-02-01, and the last possible resolution time will be 2019-01-01. | true | 2017-12-31 | Will interest in Veganism further increase in 2018? | metaculus | 0 |
2019-01-02 | 2017-11-16 | [] | binary | [["2017-11-21", 0.82], ["2017-11-21", 0.705], ["2017-11-21", 0.729], ["2017-11-22", 0.699], ["2017-11-22", 0.687], ["2017-11-22", 0.687], ["2017-11-22", 0.659], ["2017-11-22", 0.652], ["2017-11-23", 0.634], ["2017-11-23", 0.625], ["2017-11-24", 0.602], ["2017-11-25", 0.606], ["2017-11-26", 0.606], ["2017-11-26", 0.608], ["2017-11-26", 0.615], ["2017-11-27", 0.614], ["2017-11-27", 0.614], ["2017-11-27", 0.61], ["2017-11-28", 0.609], ["2017-11-29", 0.609], ["2017-11-29", 0.61], ["2017-12-01", 0.61], ["2017-12-01", 0.607], ["2017-12-02", 0.61], ["2017-12-03", 0.606], ["2017-12-04", 0.607], ["2017-12-06", 0.603], ["2017-12-09", 0.604], ["2017-12-09", 0.601], ["2017-12-14", 0.595], ["2017-12-29", 0.595], ["2017-12-29", 0.597], ["2018-01-03", 0.588], ["2018-01-03", 0.588], ["2018-01-04", 0.585], ["2018-01-05", 0.585], ["2018-01-05", 0.582], ["2018-01-08", 0.581], ["2018-01-09", 0.588], ["2018-01-09", 0.583], ["2018-01-10", 0.582], ["2018-01-11", 0.584], ["2018-01-14", 0.588], ["2018-01-14", 0.579], ["2018-01-24", 0.582], ["2018-01-25", 0.583], ["2018-01-26", 0.583], ["2018-01-26", 0.585], ["2018-02-03", 0.586], ["2018-02-04", 0.582], ["2018-02-04", 0.582], ["2018-02-22", 0.58], ["2018-02-22", 0.58], ["2018-03-01", 0.578], ["2018-03-02", 0.577], ["2018-03-02", 0.574], ["2018-03-05", 0.574], ["2018-03-08", 0.58], ["2018-03-10", 0.58], ["2018-03-10", 0.58], ["2018-03-12", 0.58], ["2018-03-12", 0.58], ["2018-03-13", 0.58], ["2018-03-13", 0.58], ["2018-03-15", 0.583], ["2018-03-16", 0.583], ["2018-03-17", 0.583], ["2018-03-18", 0.587], ["2018-03-20", 0.589], ["2018-03-21", 0.589], ["2018-03-26", 0.589], ["2018-03-28", 0.58], ["2018-03-30", 0.58], ["2018-03-30", 0.583], ["2018-04-05", 0.583], ["2018-04-09", 0.586], ["2018-04-10", 0.586], ["2018-04-10", 0.586], ["2018-04-11", 0.585], ["2018-04-16", 0.585], ["2018-04-16", 0.585], ["2018-04-17", 0.58], ["2018-04-17", 0.58], ["2018-04-19", 0.581], ["2018-04-19", 0.581], ["2018-04-22", 0.581], ["2018-04-29", 0.581], ["2018-04-30", 0.58], ["2018-04-30", 0.574], ["2018-05-04", 0.572], ["2018-05-10", 0.568], ["2018-05-10", 0.568], ["2018-05-10", 0.568], ["2018-05-10", 0.571], ["2018-05-13", 0.572], ["2018-05-15", 0.572], ["2018-05-15", 0.576], ["2018-05-16", 0.58], ["2018-05-16", 0.579], ["2018-05-16", 0.577], ["2018-05-16", 0.577]] | https://www.metaculus.com/api2/questions/584/ | Not applicable/available for this question. | Arts & Recreation | Copyright law gives the authors of creative works the exclusive right, for a period of time, to create and distribute copies of those works. After that time expires, the ownership of the works reverts to the "public domain," which means that anyone can freely copy, use, and expand upon the original work.
In the United States, the limited term of copyright has been extended several times. The most recent extension, the Sonny Bono Copyright Act of 1998, has ensured that no additional published works have entered the public domain in the last 18 years. Under current law, the next batch of published works to enter public domain will be on January 1, 2019. On that date works published in 1923 will lose copyright protection.
Critics of the Bono Act derisively named it the "Mickey Mouse Protection Act" based on the extensive lobbying of Disney for the legislation. They note that the last two times copyright has been set to run out on a large body of works, the law has been changed to extend the copyright period, giving effectively unlimited copyright duration.
Will books published in 1923 enter the U.S. public domain on January 1, 2019?
Resolution will be positive if media reports in January 2019 indicate that generally all books published in 1923 are now in the public domain in the U.S. (Exceptions based on unauthorized publication or similar unique circumstances will not invalidate this.) | true | 2018-05-16 | Will public domain day happen in the U.S. in 2019? | metaculus | 1 |
2019-01-01 | 2017-11-20 | [] | binary | [["2017-11-23", 0.47], ["2017-11-23", 0.47], ["2017-11-23", 0.342], ["2017-11-23", 0.304], ["2017-11-23", 0.27], ["2017-11-24", 0.27], ["2017-11-24", 0.31], ["2017-11-24", 0.328], ["2017-11-24", 0.345], ["2017-11-24", 0.336], ["2017-11-24", 0.336], ["2017-11-25", 0.353], ["2017-11-25", 0.353], ["2017-11-26", 0.387], ["2017-11-26", 0.389], ["2017-11-27", 0.394], ["2017-11-27", 0.381], ["2017-11-27", 0.381], ["2017-11-28", 0.403], ["2017-12-01", 0.401], ["2017-12-01", 0.405], ["2017-12-01", 0.405], ["2017-12-02", 0.385], ["2017-12-02", 0.368], ["2017-12-02", 0.369], ["2017-12-04", 0.369], ["2017-12-04", 0.372], ["2017-12-05", 0.367], ["2017-12-06", 0.367], ["2017-12-08", 0.385], ["2017-12-08", 0.367], ["2017-12-09", 0.36], ["2017-12-11", 0.36], ["2017-12-11", 0.361], ["2017-12-12", 0.361], ["2017-12-13", 0.362], ["2017-12-21", 0.363], ["2017-12-21", 0.372], ["2017-12-24", 0.372], ["2017-12-28", 0.373], ["2017-12-29", 0.354], ["2017-12-29", 0.35], ["2018-01-03", 0.341], ["2018-01-03", 0.344], ["2018-01-03", 0.347], ["2018-01-03", 0.346], ["2018-01-03", 0.347], ["2018-01-03", 0.347], ["2018-01-03", 0.341], ["2018-01-03", 0.341], ["2018-01-03", 0.34], ["2018-01-03", 0.34], ["2018-01-04", 0.341], ["2018-01-05", 0.335], ["2018-01-05", 0.345], ["2018-01-05", 0.345], ["2018-01-05", 0.344], ["2018-01-06", 0.34], ["2018-01-08", 0.335], ["2018-01-08", 0.335], ["2018-01-10", 0.342], ["2018-01-11", 0.34], ["2018-01-12", 0.34], ["2018-01-14", 0.342], ["2018-01-14", 0.341], ["2018-01-16", 0.335], ["2018-01-18", 0.335], ["2018-01-18", 0.331], ["2018-01-18", 0.332], ["2018-01-18", 0.332], ["2018-01-18", 0.327], ["2018-01-20", 0.327], ["2018-01-20", 0.328], ["2018-01-21", 0.329], ["2018-01-22", 0.329], ["2018-01-22", 0.33], ["2018-01-22", 0.329], ["2018-01-23", 0.329], ["2018-01-24", 0.335], ["2018-01-25", 0.331], ["2018-01-25", 0.331], ["2018-01-26", 0.333], ["2018-01-27", 0.332], ["2018-01-27", 0.332], ["2018-01-27", 0.336], ["2018-01-28", 0.336], ["2018-01-29", 0.336], ["2018-01-29", 0.332], ["2018-01-30", 0.333], ["2018-01-31", 0.335], ["2018-01-31", 0.334], ["2018-01-31", 0.335], ["2018-01-31", 0.335], ["2018-01-31", 0.341], ["2018-01-31", 0.338]] | https://www.metaculus.com/api2/questions/588/ | Not applicable/available for this question. | Environment & Energy | In a study published in Geophysical Research Letters, Bilham and Bendick predict that, because of Earth’s slowing rotation, Earth will see a significant increase in large earthquakes in 2018.
“The inference is clear,” Bilham told the Guardian. “Next year we should see a significant increase in numbers of severe earthquakes.”
"Instead of an average of about 15-20 large earthquakes, we might see 25 or 30 in 2018" Quartz writes.
Will there be a significant upsurge in large earthquakes predicted for 2018?
The question resolves in the positive if the number of earthquakes of magnitude greater than or equal to 7.0 as reported by USGS (e.g. here) in 2018 is greater than 25. | true | 2018-02-01 | A surge in large earthquakes in 2018? | metaculus | 0 |
2018-12-31 | 2017-11-20 | [] | binary | [["2017-11-24", 0.05], ["2017-11-25", 0.107], ["2017-11-25", 0.131], ["2017-11-26", 0.149], ["2017-11-27", 0.147], ["2017-11-28", 0.145], ["2017-11-29", 0.143], ["2017-11-29", 0.141], ["2017-11-30", 0.143], ["2017-12-01", 0.143], ["2017-12-02", 0.152], ["2017-12-02", 0.152], ["2017-12-03", 0.152], ["2017-12-04", 0.154], ["2017-12-05", 0.153], ["2017-12-05", 0.15], ["2017-12-06", 0.15], ["2017-12-06", 0.146], ["2017-12-13", 0.145], ["2017-12-13", 0.143], ["2017-12-14", 0.142], ["2017-12-20", 0.144], ["2017-12-21", 0.146], ["2017-12-21", 0.14], ["2017-12-22", 0.138], ["2017-12-24", 0.138], ["2017-12-24", 0.138], ["2017-12-27", 0.135], ["2017-12-29", 0.135], ["2017-12-31", 0.135], ["2017-12-31", 0.132], ["2018-01-02", 0.132], ["2018-01-03", 0.131], ["2018-01-03", 0.132], ["2018-01-04", 0.129], ["2018-01-05", 0.13], ["2018-01-07", 0.13], ["2018-01-07", 0.133], ["2018-01-08", 0.135], ["2018-01-09", 0.135], ["2018-01-10", 0.136], ["2018-01-12", 0.135], ["2018-01-14", 0.135], ["2018-01-16", 0.138], ["2018-01-29", 0.138], ["2018-01-29", 0.136], ["2018-01-30", 0.136], ["2018-01-30", 0.135], ["2018-01-31", 0.135], ["2018-02-01", 0.13], ["2018-02-03", 0.129], ["2018-02-04", 0.129], ["2018-02-05", 0.129], ["2018-02-06", 0.129], ["2018-02-07", 0.129], ["2018-02-08", 0.129], ["2018-02-09", 0.13], ["2018-02-11", 0.13], ["2018-02-12", 0.129], ["2018-02-13", 0.129], ["2018-02-13", 0.129], ["2018-02-14", 0.129], ["2018-02-15", 0.128], ["2018-02-15", 0.126], ["2018-02-17", 0.125], ["2018-02-17", 0.125], ["2018-02-18", 0.125], ["2018-02-20", 0.125], ["2018-02-22", 0.125], ["2018-02-24", 0.125], ["2018-03-03", 0.125], ["2018-03-05", 0.125], ["2018-03-06", 0.125], ["2018-03-07", 0.125], ["2018-03-07", 0.124], ["2018-03-08", 0.125], ["2018-03-10", 0.124], ["2018-03-11", 0.124], ["2018-03-11", 0.121], ["2018-03-12", 0.12], ["2018-03-12", 0.121], ["2018-03-14", 0.122], ["2018-03-14", 0.121], ["2018-03-16", 0.121], ["2018-03-17", 0.12], ["2018-03-17", 0.117], ["2018-03-19", 0.117], ["2018-03-20", 0.117], ["2018-03-22", 0.117], ["2018-03-22", 0.116], ["2018-03-23", 0.115], ["2018-03-23", 0.114], ["2018-03-24", 0.114], ["2018-03-25", 0.113], ["2018-03-26", 0.112], ["2018-03-27", 0.112], ["2018-03-28", 0.112], ["2018-03-29", 0.115], ["2018-03-29", 0.114], ["2018-03-31", 0.114], ["2018-03-31", 0.114]] | https://www.metaculus.com/api2/questions/589/ | Not applicable/available for this question. | Economics & Business | Some industry analysts including Former GM boss Bob Lutz predict that the electric vehicle and solar energy producer will go out of business before 2019.
The company is having difficulty with mass-producing the Model 3 and has been spending about 1 billion a quarter on R and D. There is increasing competition from other automakers and the potential repeal of the EV tax credit will reduce consumer incentive to buy electric vehicles. The acquisition of troubled energy company Solar City as well as many other acquistions given the company a large amountof debt, and as of this date, Tesla has never posted a yearly profit.
Many analyst point out that for every day that model 3 production is behind schedule the company is hemorrhageing cash, decreasing the likelihood it will find willing investors to raise the capital needed to keep the company afloat.
Given these factors, what is the likelihood of Tesla going Bankrupt before 2019?
Resolves positive if Tesla files for bankruptcy before Jan 1, 2019. | true | 2018-04-01 | Will Tesla go out of business before 2019? | metaculus | 0 |
2023-02-09 | 2017-11-21 | ["https://www.eiu.com/n/campaigns/democracy-index-2022/", "https://pages.eiu.com/rs/753-RIQ-438/images/DI-final-version-report.pdf?mkt_tok=NzUzLVJJUS00MzgAAAGJ9L0FPtq8HK8Ht7N74Y32MrHV2l2fYWmP-Ff8lsYKIDfh8WyCqk0QclKBkMBz0phBFoRvmAGOowxp9lx_Lz_Xb2OuTXaYVoyENlO7-Krsvi-Hsg"] | binary | [["2017-11-24", 0.2], ["2017-11-24", 0.3], ["2017-11-24", 0.3], ["2017-11-24", 0.37], ["2017-11-24", 0.382], ["2017-11-24", 0.382], ["2017-11-24", 0.346], ["2017-11-25", 0.379], ["2017-11-25", 0.406], ["2017-11-25", 0.405], ["2017-11-25", 0.403], ["2017-11-25", 0.403], ["2017-11-25", 0.408], ["2017-11-26", 0.408], ["2017-11-26", 0.396], ["2017-11-26", 0.405], ["2017-11-27", 0.401], ["2017-11-27", 0.399], ["2017-11-27", 0.405], ["2017-11-27", 0.405], ["2017-11-27", 0.392], ["2017-11-27", 0.392], ["2017-11-28", 0.397], ["2017-11-28", 0.402], ["2017-11-28", 0.414], ["2017-12-01", 0.414], ["2017-12-02", 0.411], ["2017-12-02", 0.414], ["2017-12-03", 0.414], ["2017-12-05", 0.419], ["2017-12-05", 0.416], ["2017-12-06", 0.416], ["2017-12-12", 0.408], ["2017-12-17", 0.411], ["2017-12-21", 0.411], ["2017-12-22", 0.412], ["2017-12-22", 0.4], ["2017-12-29", 0.389], ["2017-12-30", 0.376], ["2017-12-30", 0.378], ["2017-12-31", 0.388], ["2018-01-02", 0.388], ["2018-01-02", 0.388], ["2018-01-03", 0.385], ["2018-01-03", 0.385], ["2018-01-03", 0.388], ["2018-01-03", 0.388], ["2018-01-03", 0.393], ["2018-01-03", 0.393], ["2018-01-03", 0.393], ["2018-01-05", 0.398], ["2018-01-07", 0.406], ["2018-01-08", 0.409], ["2018-01-09", 0.401], ["2018-01-09", 0.403], ["2018-01-10", 0.406], ["2018-01-14", 0.406], ["2018-01-18", 0.406], ["2018-01-18", 0.41], ["2018-01-24", 0.421], ["2018-01-24", 0.421], ["2018-01-25", 0.428], ["2018-01-25", 0.429], ["2018-01-29", 0.429], ["2018-02-02", 0.427], ["2018-02-04", 0.427], ["2018-02-04", 0.431], ["2018-02-04", 0.431], ["2018-02-07", 0.427], ["2018-02-08", 0.429], ["2018-02-15", 0.429], ["2018-02-20", 0.426], ["2018-02-20", 0.427], ["2018-02-20", 0.427], ["2018-02-20", 0.427], ["2018-02-20", 0.427], ["2018-02-22", 0.424], ["2018-02-22", 0.422], ["2018-02-24", 0.424], ["2018-02-24", 0.424], ["2018-02-24", 0.424], ["2018-02-24", 0.424], ["2018-02-25", 0.424], ["2018-02-25", 0.425], ["2018-02-25", 0.43], ["2018-02-26", 0.43], ["2018-02-26", 0.43], ["2018-02-27", 0.431], ["2018-02-28", 0.431], ["2018-02-28", 0.43], ["2018-03-01", 0.43], ["2018-03-01", 0.43], ["2018-03-01", 0.432], ["2018-03-01", 0.432]] | https://www.metaculus.com/api2/questions/590/ | Not applicable/available for this question. | Politics & Governance | The state of democracy in the world has gradually improved throughout the 20th century and some people seem to take future democratization for granted. Regrettably, a more pessimistic person could also see several upcoming problems. One would be the fading of living memory of the horrors of fascism in Europe and another could be the continued rise of refugee-wave fuelled right-wing populism in Europe.
Also potentially troubling is the ability of governments to spy on their citizens like never before due to modern technology and Google's ability to act as a sort of filter to what you see. The advent of AI could only further exacerbate these problems.
To measure democracy, we will use the Democracy Index from the Economist Intelligence Unit. The index ranks countries on a 0 to 10 scale.
On the unit's scale, the meaning of the numbers is as follows:
8 ≤ s ≤ 10 : Full democracy
6 ≤ s ≤ 8 : Flawed democracy
4 ≤ s ≤ 6 : Hybrid regime
0 ≤ s ≤ 4 : Authoritarian regime
More information can also be found on Wikipedia.
The 2016 global average democracy index stands at 5.52 (exactly where it was in 2006, so no progress in the last 10 years). Note that the global average is simply the average of all the individual country values; there is no weighting by population.
It is asked:Will be the global average Democracy Index in 2022 be higher than the one in 2017?
Should the Economist Intelligence unit not publish a Democracy Index for year 2022, we will have to resolve ambiguous. If there is significant concern regarding the index's continued neutrality, we should also resolve ambiguous. | true | 2018-03-02 | Will the world be more democratic in 2022 than in 2017? | metaculus | 0 |
2019-01-02 | 2017-11-23 | [] | binary | [["2017-11-23", 0.1], ["2017-11-24", 0.422], ["2017-11-24", 0.39], ["2017-11-25", 0.404], ["2017-11-25", 0.402], ["2017-11-26", 0.402], ["2017-11-26", 0.396], ["2017-11-27", 0.393], ["2017-11-27", 0.41], ["2017-11-28", 0.41], ["2017-11-28", 0.41], ["2017-11-29", 0.422], ["2017-11-29", 0.417], ["2017-11-30", 0.417], ["2017-12-01", 0.409], ["2017-12-02", 0.409], ["2017-12-02", 0.409], ["2017-12-03", 0.411], ["2017-12-05", 0.412], ["2017-12-06", 0.407], ["2017-12-09", 0.404], ["2017-12-11", 0.406], ["2017-12-11", 0.412], ["2017-12-13", 0.412], ["2017-12-16", 0.427], ["2017-12-21", 0.427], ["2017-12-21", 0.435], ["2017-12-29", 0.435], ["2018-01-03", 0.436], ["2018-01-04", 0.452], ["2018-01-09", 0.452], ["2018-01-10", 0.447], ["2018-01-10", 0.455], ["2018-01-14", 0.46], ["2018-01-18", 0.454], ["2018-01-18", 0.461], ["2018-01-24", 0.464], ["2018-02-01", 0.464], ["2018-02-09", 0.46], ["2018-02-13", 0.46], ["2018-02-15", 0.458], ["2018-02-28", 0.452], ["2018-03-12", 0.447], ["2018-03-12", 0.447], ["2018-03-12", 0.454], ["2018-03-15", 0.454], ["2018-03-21", 0.45], ["2018-03-31", 0.45], ["2018-04-03", 0.449], ["2018-04-04", 0.449], ["2018-04-05", 0.447], ["2018-04-06", 0.447], ["2018-04-08", 0.445], ["2018-04-09", 0.447], ["2018-04-14", 0.452], ["2018-04-15", 0.452], ["2018-04-17", 0.452], ["2018-04-17", 0.453], ["2018-04-18", 0.45], ["2018-04-18", 0.45], ["2018-04-19", 0.45], ["2018-04-23", 0.448], ["2018-04-24", 0.446], ["2018-04-27", 0.448], ["2018-04-30", 0.449], ["2018-05-01", 0.449], ["2018-05-04", 0.45], ["2018-05-05", 0.45], ["2018-05-11", 0.452], ["2018-05-14", 0.452], ["2018-05-15", 0.453], ["2018-05-15", 0.454], ["2018-05-17", 0.454], ["2018-05-27", 0.453], ["2018-05-27", 0.454], ["2018-05-28", 0.454], ["2018-05-31", 0.457], ["2018-06-03", 0.456], ["2018-06-04", 0.456], ["2018-06-06", 0.456], ["2018-06-06", 0.456], ["2018-06-07", 0.455], ["2018-06-07", 0.451], ["2018-06-08", 0.453], ["2018-06-09", 0.453], ["2018-06-11", 0.45], ["2018-06-12", 0.448], ["2018-06-14", 0.449], ["2018-06-14", 0.449], ["2018-06-15", 0.449], ["2018-06-15", 0.45], ["2018-06-18", 0.449], ["2018-06-19", 0.447], ["2018-06-22", 0.449], ["2018-06-25", 0.449], ["2018-06-27", 0.449], ["2018-06-29", 0.45], ["2018-06-30", 0.447], ["2018-06-30", 0.447], ["2018-07-01", 0.447], ["2018-07-01", 0.445]] | https://www.metaculus.com/api2/questions/592/ | Not applicable/available for this question. | Science & Tech | The astronomical community, and increasingly, the broader public, have been abuzz over the recent passage of an interstellar asteroid through the solar system. The interloping object, now officially known as 'Oumuamua (Hawaiian for "messenger from the distant past") was discovered by the PanSTARRS monitoring system on October 19th, 2017. It was quickly confirmed to have a strongly hyperbolic trajectory (with heliocentric velocity v~26 km/sec at infinity), and follow-up observations (see also, here) show that it has a rotation period of roughly seven hours, a reddish overall color, and a highly elongated overall shape. Assuming that 'Oumuamua has low reflectivity, its long axis is approximately 400m, and its mass is of order a billion kilograms. Curiously, no sign of coma has been detected, indicating that volatiles such as water ice are not exposed on its surface. These unusual properties have sparked speculation that `Oumuamua is a directed interstellar probe, and various SETI-related efforts are underway to examine it.
The detection of `Oumuamua in the face of various observational biases suggests that such objects may pervade the Galaxy, with a number density estimated to be of order one per ten cubic astronomical units. We therefore ask: Prior to January 1, 2019, will one or more additional interstellar objects be observed passing within a sphere of radius 50 AU centered on the Sun?
In order for this question to resolve positively, a newly discovered interstellar object must either, 1. be reported in a peer-reviewed journal as having a hyperbolic orbit (eccentricity, e>1) prior to crossing a sphere of 50AU radius centered on the Sun, or 2. receive an "I" designation from the IAU Minor Planet Center, or both. | true | 2018-07-01 | Will one or more additional interstellar asteroids be detected by 2019? | metaculus | 0 |
2019-01-01 | 2017-11-28 | [] | binary | [["2017-12-01", 0.25], ["2017-12-01", 0.25], ["2017-12-01", 0.26], ["2017-12-01", 0.268], ["2017-12-01", 0.268], ["2017-12-01", 0.242], ["2017-12-01", 0.278], ["2017-12-01", 0.277], ["2017-12-01", 0.272], ["2017-12-01", 0.27], ["2017-12-02", 0.285], ["2017-12-02", 0.299], ["2017-12-02", 0.305], ["2017-12-02", 0.308], ["2017-12-02", 0.308], ["2017-12-02", 0.339], ["2017-12-02", 0.336], ["2017-12-03", 0.336], ["2017-12-03", 0.335], ["2017-12-03", 0.333], ["2017-12-03", 0.333], ["2017-12-04", 0.338], ["2017-12-04", 0.341], ["2017-12-04", 0.346], ["2017-12-04", 0.339], ["2017-12-06", 0.341], ["2017-12-07", 0.341], ["2017-12-08", 0.334], ["2017-12-08", 0.331], ["2017-12-08", 0.322], ["2017-12-08", 0.327], ["2017-12-09", 0.322], ["2017-12-11", 0.327], ["2017-12-12", 0.325], ["2017-12-12", 0.323], ["2017-12-13", 0.323], ["2017-12-13", 0.319], ["2017-12-14", 0.319], ["2018-01-02", 0.323], ["2018-01-02", 0.323], ["2018-01-03", 0.336], ["2018-01-03", 0.336], ["2018-01-03", 0.337], ["2018-01-03", 0.339], ["2018-01-04", 0.342], ["2018-01-04", 0.342], ["2018-01-05", 0.342], ["2018-01-05", 0.342], ["2018-01-08", 0.342], ["2018-01-08", 0.343], ["2018-01-09", 0.343], ["2018-01-09", 0.344], ["2018-01-09", 0.346], ["2018-01-10", 0.345], ["2018-01-10", 0.345], ["2018-01-14", 0.346], ["2018-01-15", 0.346], ["2018-01-15", 0.342], ["2018-01-18", 0.342], ["2018-01-26", 0.342], ["2018-01-26", 0.346], ["2018-01-27", 0.345], ["2018-01-29", 0.345], ["2018-01-29", 0.352], ["2018-01-29", 0.352], ["2018-01-31", 0.35], ["2018-01-31", 0.349], ["2018-02-01", 0.348], ["2018-02-02", 0.348], ["2018-02-04", 0.344], ["2018-02-04", 0.344], ["2018-02-05", 0.342], ["2018-02-08", 0.342], ["2018-02-08", 0.345], ["2018-02-08", 0.345], ["2018-02-08", 0.344], ["2018-02-09", 0.344], ["2018-02-09", 0.344], ["2018-02-09", 0.344], ["2018-02-09", 0.344], ["2018-02-10", 0.341], ["2018-02-11", 0.341], ["2018-02-11", 0.34], ["2018-02-13", 0.337], ["2018-02-13", 0.334], ["2018-02-14", 0.334], ["2018-02-14", 0.326], ["2018-02-16", 0.327], ["2018-02-16", 0.325], ["2018-02-19", 0.325], ["2018-02-21", 0.324], ["2018-02-21", 0.323], ["2018-02-22", 0.322], ["2018-02-22", 0.322], ["2018-02-22", 0.323], ["2018-02-22", 0.323], ["2018-02-23", 0.321], ["2018-02-23", 0.323], ["2018-02-25", 0.323], ["2018-02-25", 0.326], ["2018-02-28", 0.326]] | https://www.metaculus.com/api2/questions/595/ | Not applicable/available for this question. | Politics & Governance | One of the 50 predictions made by Fortune magazine in November 2017 began as follows: "A snowballing sexual harassment scandal in Parliament and divisions over Brexit will coalesce into a force strong enough to bring down Theresa May’s government. The Labour Party’s Jeremy Corbyn will become U.K. Prime Minister and will try to complete Brexit negotiations with the EU".
That's rather specific, but the core of the prediction is clear: Theresa May's government will not survive to the end of 2018, and a quite different government will succeed it. Is that right?
This question will resolve positive if, at some point no later than the end of 2018, the United Kingdom has a Prime Minister who is not a member of the Conservative Party.
It will resolve negative if at the end of 2018 the UK's Prime Minister is a member of the Conservative Party, and if between now and then the UK has not had a Prime Minister who isn't.
It will resolve ambiguous in other cases.
Notes on the resolution conditions: for positive resolution the PM needn't be Jeremy Corbyn, nor need it be a member of the Labour Party. The question will even resolve positive if Theresa May remains in power but leaves the Conservative Party. For negative resolution the PM needn't still be Theresa May, and there can be PM-less gaps if e.g. there is a general election between now and the end of 2018. | true | 2018-03-01 | Will the UK's Conservative government fall by the end of 2018? | metaculus | 0 |
2018-06-20 | 2017-11-28 | [] | binary | [["2017-12-05", 0.5], ["2017-12-05", 0.556], ["2017-12-06", 0.567], ["2017-12-06", 0.552], ["2017-12-06", 0.569], ["2017-12-07", 0.565], ["2017-12-07", 0.581], ["2017-12-07", 0.605], ["2017-12-07", 0.598], ["2017-12-09", 0.589], ["2017-12-09", 0.592], ["2017-12-10", 0.597], ["2017-12-11", 0.597], ["2017-12-11", 0.587], ["2017-12-12", 0.594], ["2017-12-13", 0.593], ["2017-12-14", 0.575], ["2017-12-14", 0.569], ["2017-12-16", 0.569], ["2017-12-17", 0.55], ["2017-12-19", 0.562], ["2017-12-21", 0.562], ["2017-12-21", 0.555], ["2017-12-25", 0.558], ["2017-12-25", 0.558], ["2017-12-26", 0.556], ["2017-12-26", 0.556], ["2017-12-28", 0.551], ["2017-12-29", 0.551], ["2017-12-29", 0.538], ["2017-12-29", 0.538], ["2017-12-31", 0.538], ["2017-12-31", 0.538], ["2017-12-31", 0.535], ["2017-12-31", 0.546], ["2018-01-01", 0.546], ["2018-01-01", 0.543], ["2018-01-02", 0.543], ["2018-01-02", 0.541], ["2018-01-02", 0.54], ["2018-01-03", 0.528], ["2018-01-03", 0.528], ["2018-01-03", 0.523], ["2018-01-04", 0.514], ["2018-01-04", 0.518], ["2018-01-05", 0.523], ["2018-01-05", 0.524], ["2018-01-07", 0.519], ["2018-01-08", 0.517], ["2018-01-09", 0.521], ["2018-01-09", 0.52], ["2018-01-10", 0.52], ["2018-01-10", 0.522], ["2018-01-10", 0.521], ["2018-01-11", 0.519], ["2018-01-11", 0.521], ["2018-01-11", 0.52], ["2018-01-11", 0.516], ["2018-01-12", 0.521], ["2018-01-12", 0.52], ["2018-01-12", 0.52], ["2018-01-12", 0.517], ["2018-01-13", 0.517], ["2018-01-13", 0.511], ["2018-01-13", 0.511], ["2018-01-14", 0.511], ["2018-01-14", 0.511], ["2018-01-15", 0.51], ["2018-01-17", 0.508], ["2018-01-18", 0.508], ["2018-01-23", 0.508], ["2018-01-24", 0.508], ["2018-01-25", 0.508], ["2018-01-25", 0.51], ["2018-01-28", 0.515], ["2018-01-28", 0.521], ["2018-01-30", 0.521], ["2018-01-31", 0.52], ["2018-01-31", 0.521], ["2018-02-01", 0.52], ["2018-02-01", 0.52], ["2018-02-03", 0.519], ["2018-02-03", 0.519], ["2018-02-04", 0.519], ["2018-02-05", 0.518], ["2018-02-05", 0.516], ["2018-02-05", 0.514], ["2018-02-06", 0.51], ["2018-02-07", 0.507], ["2018-02-08", 0.509], ["2018-02-11", 0.507], ["2018-02-12", 0.507], ["2018-02-13", 0.508], ["2018-02-14", 0.506], ["2018-02-16", 0.507], ["2018-02-22", 0.507], ["2018-02-22", 0.506], ["2018-02-25", 0.506], ["2018-02-25", 0.506], ["2018-02-28", 0.501], ["2018-02-28", 0.501]] | https://www.metaculus.com/api2/questions/597/ | Not applicable/available for this question. | Politics & Governance | One of the 50 predictions made by Fortune magazine in November 2017 runs as follows: "The court’s key swing vote, Anthony Kennedy, has a flair for the dramatic. He will cast the deciding vote in a 5–4 ruling in Gill v. Whitford that will declare the serpentine redrawing of election districts for political purposes to be unconstitutional."
Gill v. Whitford is concerned with Wisconsin's 2011 redistricting, which in the 2012 elections gave the Republicans 60% of the seats from 49% of the votes. A District Court decision ruled that the redistricting was in violation of the Fourteenth Amendment to the US Constitution on the grounds that it deprived everyone but Republicans of "equal protection". The case was appealed to the Supreme Court, which is expected to decide it in mid-2018. The plaintiffs' case is based in part on various measures of gerrymandering, such as the so-called efficiency gap, and if the District Court's decision stands then it will likely make it easier for future gerrymandering cases to be brought on the basis of such measures.
The question resolves negative if, by the end of 2018, the Supreme Court upholds the appeal by Gill et al, and positive if, by the end of 2018, the repeal is rejected. In other cases, it resolves ambiguous.
Note on resolution conditions and title: In principle the Supreme Court could reject the appeal but deliberately not endorse any particular way of measuring gerrymandering, or could endorse some clear way of measuring gerrymandering that somehow doesn't reckon the Wisconsin redistricting to be a case of gerrymandering. I don't think these are likely enough outcomes for the slight divergence between title and resolution conditions to be a problem, but I'm willing to be persuaded.
(edited 12/21/17 plaintiffs -> defendants for consistency with rest of question.)
(edited 1/10/17 for further clarifying wording.) | true | 2018-03-01 | Will the Supreme Court set clear limits on partisan gerrymandering in 2018? | metaculus | 0 |
2018-06-21 | 2017-12-03 | [] | binary | [["2017-12-06", 0.22], ["2017-12-06", 0.291], ["2017-12-07", 0.314], ["2017-12-07", 0.312], ["2017-12-07", 0.324], ["2017-12-07", 0.316], ["2017-12-08", 0.304], ["2017-12-08", 0.304], ["2017-12-08", 0.294], ["2017-12-09", 0.297], ["2017-12-09", 0.306], ["2017-12-09", 0.312], ["2017-12-11", 0.312], ["2017-12-11", 0.313], ["2017-12-12", 0.31], ["2017-12-12", 0.305], ["2017-12-12", 0.31], ["2017-12-13", 0.316], ["2017-12-13", 0.312], ["2017-12-14", 0.313], ["2017-12-21", 0.31], ["2017-12-21", 0.332], ["2017-12-26", 0.332], ["2017-12-26", 0.335], ["2017-12-27", 0.334], ["2017-12-28", 0.333], ["2017-12-29", 0.33], ["2017-12-29", 0.321], ["2017-12-29", 0.321], ["2017-12-30", 0.314], ["2017-12-31", 0.314], ["2018-01-01", 0.313], ["2018-01-02", 0.305], ["2018-01-02", 0.305], ["2018-01-03", 0.301], ["2018-01-03", 0.31], ["2018-01-03", 0.31], ["2018-01-04", 0.316], ["2018-01-04", 0.313], ["2018-01-04", 0.315], ["2018-01-05", 0.314], ["2018-01-05", 0.32], ["2018-01-06", 0.324], ["2018-01-06", 0.324], ["2018-01-06", 0.322], ["2018-01-07", 0.324], ["2018-01-07", 0.324], ["2018-01-08", 0.326], ["2018-01-09", 0.326], ["2018-01-09", 0.323], ["2018-01-09", 0.323], ["2018-01-09", 0.321], ["2018-01-10", 0.321], ["2018-01-10", 0.321], ["2018-01-10", 0.324], ["2018-01-11", 0.324], ["2018-01-11", 0.323], ["2018-01-11", 0.325], ["2018-01-12", 0.325], ["2018-01-13", 0.322], ["2018-01-14", 0.318], ["2018-01-14", 0.317], ["2018-01-15", 0.317], ["2018-01-16", 0.313], ["2018-01-17", 0.31], ["2018-01-17", 0.308], ["2018-01-18", 0.309], ["2018-01-19", 0.311], ["2018-01-20", 0.312], ["2018-01-21", 0.309], ["2018-01-21", 0.306], ["2018-01-22", 0.306], ["2018-01-22", 0.311], ["2018-01-23", 0.311], ["2018-01-23", 0.311], ["2018-01-24", 0.31], ["2018-01-25", 0.31], ["2018-01-25", 0.309], ["2018-01-25", 0.309], ["2018-01-25", 0.309], ["2018-01-26", 0.307], ["2018-01-26", 0.306], ["2018-01-27", 0.306], ["2018-01-28", 0.306], ["2018-01-29", 0.303], ["2018-01-30", 0.299], ["2018-01-30", 0.299], ["2018-02-01", 0.3], ["2018-02-05", 0.3], ["2018-02-06", 0.298], ["2018-02-09", 0.298], ["2018-02-09", 0.297], ["2018-02-11", 0.296], ["2018-02-11", 0.296], ["2018-02-12", 0.296], ["2018-02-12", 0.295], ["2018-02-13", 0.294], ["2018-02-13", 0.295], ["2018-02-14", 0.284], ["2018-02-14", 0.275], ["2018-02-15", 0.271]] | https://www.metaculus.com/api2/questions/599/ | Not applicable/available for this question. | Politics & Governance | Dominos continue to fall in Mueller's investigation of involvement of Russia in the 2016 presidential election.
As of question writing, Papadopoulos was charged, pled guilty, and is apparently cooperating with the FBI. Paul Manafort has been charged but pled innocent. Michael Flynn has pled guilty to a single charge of lying to the FBI, and is apparently cooperating with the FBI.
There is widespread sentiment that these relatively "light" charges were filed primarily to acquire cooperation, as well as leave charges on the table that could be brought at a state level in the event of a presidential pardon.
What happens next?
Jared Kushner and Donald Trump Jr. have been at the center of campaign operations from the start, privy to many of the meetings and events that are under investigation. We ask:
Will Donald Trump, Jr. be charged with a crime by June 17, 2018?
As for other questions in this series, resolution is positive if credible media report indicates that Donald Trump, Jr. has been formally charged prior to the date in question. | true | 2018-02-15 | Will Donald Trump Jr. be charged with a crime by Father's Day 2018? | metaculus | 0 |
2018-12-31 | 2017-12-06 | [] | binary | [["2017-12-11", 0.35], ["2017-12-11", 0.235], ["2017-12-11", 0.235], ["2017-12-11", 0.217], ["2017-12-11", 0.217], ["2017-12-11", 0.24], ["2017-12-11", 0.22], ["2017-12-11", 0.203], ["2017-12-11", 0.19], ["2017-12-11", 0.191], ["2017-12-11", 0.192], ["2017-12-11", 0.185], ["2017-12-11", 0.185], ["2017-12-11", 0.187], ["2017-12-11", 0.203], ["2017-12-11", 0.203], ["2017-12-12", 0.194], ["2017-12-12", 0.204], ["2017-12-12", 0.208], ["2017-12-12", 0.208], ["2017-12-12", 0.201], ["2017-12-12", 0.196], ["2017-12-12", 0.218], ["2017-12-13", 0.214], ["2017-12-13", 0.218], ["2017-12-13", 0.218], ["2017-12-14", 0.21], ["2017-12-15", 0.205], ["2017-12-15", 0.227], ["2017-12-15", 0.227], ["2017-12-16", 0.228], ["2017-12-16", 0.223], ["2017-12-17", 0.221], ["2017-12-17", 0.218], ["2017-12-18", 0.219], ["2017-12-19", 0.215], ["2017-12-19", 0.213], ["2017-12-19", 0.211], ["2017-12-19", 0.211], ["2017-12-19", 0.211], ["2017-12-20", 0.236], ["2017-12-21", 0.237], ["2017-12-21", 0.232], ["2017-12-21", 0.237], ["2017-12-21", 0.234], ["2017-12-21", 0.234], ["2017-12-21", 0.244], ["2017-12-21", 0.243], ["2017-12-21", 0.239], ["2017-12-21", 0.241], ["2017-12-21", 0.241], ["2017-12-22", 0.241], ["2017-12-22", 0.236], ["2017-12-23", 0.23], ["2017-12-24", 0.246], ["2017-12-24", 0.246], ["2017-12-25", 0.247], ["2017-12-27", 0.246], ["2017-12-27", 0.244], ["2017-12-27", 0.246], ["2017-12-29", 0.246], ["2017-12-29", 0.244], ["2017-12-29", 0.241], ["2017-12-29", 0.24], ["2017-12-29", 0.24], ["2017-12-29", 0.245], ["2017-12-30", 0.253], ["2017-12-30", 0.253], ["2017-12-31", 0.252], ["2017-12-31", 0.252], ["2017-12-31", 0.252]] | https://www.metaculus.com/api2/questions/601/ | Not applicable/available for this question. | Economics & Business | Tesla has promised revolutionary new technology to the auto industry, but it has also had trouble scaling up production and has consistently posted losses.
Despite this, Tesla has a market cap of over 50 billion dollars as of the writing of this question. It is unclear how this number will evolve in the future, though.
Therefore, it is asked:Will Tesla's market cap on the 31st of December 2018 at 11:59:59 PM UTC be less than half of its market cap on the 31st of December 2017 at 11:59:59 PM UTC?
Data for resolution shall come from a google search for TSLA. The question shall also resolve positive if Tesla files for bankruptcy before 31st of December 2018 at 11:59:59 PM UTC. | true | 2017-12-31 | Will Tesla's market cap fall in half in 2018? | metaculus | 0 |
2018-02-04 | 2017-12-08 | [] | binary | [["2017-12-08", 0.47], ["2017-12-08", 0.56], ["2017-12-08", 0.573], ["2017-12-08", 0.573], ["2017-12-08", 0.508], ["2017-12-08", 0.547], ["2017-12-08", 0.522], ["2017-12-08", 0.479], ["2017-12-08", 0.479], ["2017-12-09", 0.469], ["2017-12-09", 0.471], ["2017-12-09", 0.471], ["2017-12-09", 0.473], ["2017-12-09", 0.473], ["2017-12-09", 0.469], ["2017-12-09", 0.469], ["2017-12-09", 0.484], ["2017-12-09", 0.484], ["2017-12-09", 0.494], ["2017-12-10", 0.499], ["2017-12-11", 0.509], ["2017-12-11", 0.509], ["2017-12-11", 0.527], ["2017-12-11", 0.527], ["2017-12-11", 0.561], ["2017-12-11", 0.561], ["2017-12-11", 0.561], ["2017-12-11", 0.572], ["2017-12-11", 0.564], ["2017-12-12", 0.574], ["2017-12-12", 0.573], ["2017-12-12", 0.577], ["2017-12-12", 0.575], ["2017-12-12", 0.554], ["2017-12-13", 0.552], ["2017-12-13", 0.555], ["2017-12-13", 0.555], ["2017-12-13", 0.562], ["2017-12-13", 0.562], ["2017-12-13", 0.562], ["2017-12-14", 0.555], ["2017-12-14", 0.555], ["2017-12-14", 0.553], ["2017-12-15", 0.553], ["2017-12-15", 0.54], ["2017-12-16", 0.54], ["2017-12-16", 0.533], ["2017-12-16", 0.533], ["2017-12-16", 0.541], ["2017-12-16", 0.55], ["2017-12-16", 0.553], ["2017-12-16", 0.556], ["2017-12-16", 0.556], ["2017-12-16", 0.556], ["2017-12-16", 0.55], ["2017-12-17", 0.55], ["2017-12-17", 0.553], ["2017-12-17", 0.553], ["2017-12-18", 0.553], ["2017-12-18", 0.555], ["2017-12-18", 0.552], ["2017-12-18", 0.551], ["2017-12-18", 0.551], ["2017-12-18", 0.553], ["2017-12-19", 0.55], ["2017-12-19", 0.55], ["2017-12-19", 0.531], ["2017-12-19", 0.538], ["2017-12-20", 0.538], ["2017-12-20", 0.542], ["2017-12-20", 0.542]] | https://www.metaculus.com/api2/questions/602/ | Not applicable/available for this question. | Economics & Business | Dating back to 1896, The Dow Jones Industrial Average (DJIA) has become almost synonymous with the overall value of the stock market. The index includes major industrial stocks such as DuPont, GE, Goldman Sachs, and ExxonMobile.
Recently, the DJIA has been on a tear, and as of question writing stands at 24,211.
The ongoing stock run-up, however, has been dwarfed by the success of bitcoin, which is is currently priced at $17300, having risen from roughly $770 a year ago(!)
Prior to January 31, 2018, will the numerical value of the dollar to bitcoin rate exceed the numerical value of the DJIA Index? | true | 2017-12-20 | Passing the torch part 2: Will a Bitcoin's dollar value exceed the Dow Jones Industrial Index value? | metaculus | 0 |
2019-12-26 | 2017-12-31 | [] | binary | [["2018-01-04", 0.58], ["2018-01-05", 0.613], ["2018-01-06", 0.619], ["2018-01-07", 0.631], ["2018-01-07", 0.631], ["2018-01-08", 0.631], ["2018-01-09", 0.63], ["2018-01-10", 0.647], ["2018-01-11", 0.647], ["2018-01-14", 0.631], ["2018-01-14", 0.635], ["2018-01-18", 0.633], ["2018-01-18", 0.629], ["2018-01-24", 0.63], ["2018-01-24", 0.634], ["2018-01-26", 0.634], ["2018-01-26", 0.636], ["2018-01-30", 0.636], ["2018-02-05", 0.637], ["2018-02-09", 0.633], ["2018-02-18", 0.633], ["2018-02-18", 0.636], ["2018-02-25", 0.633], ["2018-02-27", 0.627], ["2018-03-02", 0.626], ["2018-03-03", 0.601], ["2018-03-04", 0.592], ["2018-03-05", 0.587], ["2018-03-07", 0.581], ["2018-03-08", 0.578], ["2018-03-10", 0.59], ["2018-03-12", 0.59], ["2018-03-12", 0.581], ["2018-03-16", 0.581], ["2018-03-23", 0.581], ["2018-03-24", 0.581], ["2018-03-26", 0.581], ["2018-03-27", 0.574], ["2018-03-28", 0.456], ["2018-03-29", 0.417], ["2018-03-30", 0.395], ["2018-04-01", 0.395], ["2018-04-01", 0.392], ["2018-04-03", 0.387], ["2018-04-03", 0.379], ["2018-04-05", 0.374], ["2018-04-06", 0.37], ["2018-04-08", 0.362], ["2018-04-08", 0.364], ["2018-04-10", 0.358], ["2018-04-15", 0.357], ["2018-04-16", 0.356], ["2018-04-17", 0.349], ["2018-04-17", 0.349], ["2018-04-22", 0.345], ["2018-04-22", 0.345], ["2018-04-25", 0.341], ["2018-04-27", 0.334], ["2018-04-30", 0.329], ["2018-05-01", 0.329], ["2018-05-12", 0.328], ["2018-05-14", 0.324], ["2018-05-17", 0.321], ["2018-05-18", 0.319], ["2018-05-26", 0.319], ["2018-05-30", 0.319], ["2018-05-30", 0.316], ["2018-06-01", 0.316], ["2018-06-02", 0.316], ["2018-06-03", 0.31], ["2018-06-05", 0.307], ["2018-06-05", 0.303], ["2018-06-06", 0.295], ["2018-06-08", 0.29], ["2018-06-12", 0.29], ["2018-06-12", 0.287], ["2018-06-14", 0.281], ["2018-06-15", 0.281], ["2018-06-16", 0.278], ["2018-06-18", 0.278], ["2018-06-19", 0.273], ["2018-06-22", 0.27], ["2018-06-27", 0.27], ["2018-06-29", 0.261], ["2018-06-30", 0.256], ["2018-07-01", 0.255], ["2018-07-02", 0.251], ["2018-07-02", 0.247], ["2018-07-03", 0.235], ["2018-07-05", 0.228], ["2018-07-06", 0.222], ["2018-07-08", 0.223], ["2018-07-09", 0.222], ["2018-07-10", 0.222], ["2018-07-12", 0.221], ["2018-07-14", 0.219], ["2018-07-15", 0.216], ["2018-07-16", 0.212], ["2018-07-19", 0.212], ["2018-07-20", 0.168], ["2018-07-20", 0.168]] | https://www.metaculus.com/api2/questions/613/ | Not applicable/available for this question. | Science & Tech | The Hubble Space Telescope was launched into low Earth orbit in 1990 and, after a servicing mission in 1993 in order to correct the telescope's optics, it began delivering pictures of the universe of unprecedented quality.
The question of what Hubble's replacement should be was soon posed and in 1996 the planning for Hubble's successor, the James Webb Telescope, started.
Regrettably, the project became plagued by cost and schedule issues. The launch year was set to 2007 in 1997 with a budget plan for 0.5 billion dollars; currently the budget is set at 8.8 billion dollars and the telescope is scheduled for launch between March and June of 2019.
It is asked:Will the James Webb Telescope be launched prior to January 1st, 2020 at 00:00 UTC?
For positive resolution, the boosters of the rocket carrying the telescope must start firing before January 1st, 2020 at 00:00 UTC, rather than the telescope having to have arrived at the L2 Lagrangian point by that time.
The closing time for the question has been set, due to lack of a better idea, to the 49th anniversary of the Apollo 11 Moon landings.
Resolution shall be by credible media report. | true | 2018-07-21 | Will the James Webb Telescope Launch prior to 2020? | metaculus | 0 |
2019-07-01 | 2018-01-20 | [] | binary | [["2018-01-23", 0.25], ["2018-01-26", 0.237], ["2018-01-29", 0.235], ["2018-02-01", 0.244], ["2018-02-05", 0.243], ["2018-02-08", 0.239], ["2018-02-11", 0.229], ["2018-02-20", 0.227], ["2018-03-02", 0.227], ["2018-03-05", 0.225], ["2018-03-06", 0.229], ["2018-03-10", 0.229], ["2018-03-12", 0.234], ["2018-03-17", 0.234], ["2018-03-21", 0.253], ["2018-03-25", 0.246], ["2018-03-30", 0.245], ["2018-04-02", 0.248], ["2018-04-05", 0.25], ["2018-04-07", 0.254], ["2018-04-14", 0.25], ["2018-04-17", 0.248], ["2018-04-21", 0.246], ["2018-04-29", 0.245], ["2018-05-03", 0.246], ["2018-05-07", 0.243], ["2018-05-09", 0.243], ["2018-05-11", 0.245], ["2018-05-14", 0.249], ["2018-05-17", 0.247], ["2018-05-23", 0.244], ["2018-05-24", 0.246], ["2018-05-30", 0.244], ["2018-05-31", 0.247], ["2018-06-05", 0.247], ["2018-06-08", 0.248], ["2018-06-12", 0.248], ["2018-06-15", 0.244], ["2018-06-24", 0.244], ["2018-06-27", 0.242], ["2018-06-30", 0.242], ["2018-07-04", 0.239], ["2018-07-06", 0.238], ["2018-07-09", 0.237], ["2018-07-12", 0.237], ["2018-07-15", 0.236], ["2018-07-17", 0.236], ["2018-07-19", 0.236], ["2018-07-22", 0.235], ["2018-07-25", 0.235], ["2018-07-29", 0.23], ["2018-08-01", 0.23], ["2018-08-04", 0.228], ["2018-08-08", 0.23], ["2018-08-12", 0.227], ["2018-08-14", 0.227], ["2018-08-17", 0.224], ["2018-08-20", 0.222], ["2018-08-23", 0.222], ["2018-08-25", 0.222], ["2018-09-01", 0.22], ["2018-09-04", 0.219], ["2018-09-07", 0.219], ["2018-09-13", 0.217], ["2018-09-14", 0.216], ["2018-09-17", 0.216], ["2018-09-19", 0.22], ["2018-09-22", 0.219], ["2018-09-26", 0.219], ["2018-09-27", 0.215], ["2018-10-02", 0.215], ["2018-10-06", 0.221], ["2018-10-10", 0.214], ["2018-10-12", 0.211], ["2018-10-15", 0.21], ["2018-10-19", 0.21], ["2018-10-21", 0.21], ["2018-10-24", 0.218], ["2018-10-27", 0.219], ["2018-10-29", 0.226], ["2018-11-01", 0.23], ["2018-11-04", 0.234], ["2018-11-07", 0.238], ["2018-11-10", 0.245], ["2018-11-13", 0.25], ["2018-11-16", 0.25], ["2018-11-19", 0.26], ["2018-11-21", 0.261], ["2018-11-24", 0.264], ["2018-11-27", 0.267], ["2018-11-30", 0.267], ["2018-12-03", 0.267], ["2018-12-06", 0.27], ["2018-12-09", 0.27], ["2018-12-12", 0.27], ["2018-12-15", 0.272], ["2018-12-19", 0.274], ["2018-12-23", 0.277], ["2018-12-26", 0.278], ["2018-12-30", 0.279], ["2018-12-30", 0.279]] | https://www.metaculus.com/api2/questions/618/ | Not applicable/available for this question. | Science & Tech | Two years ago, two Caltech Professors -- Konstantin Batygin and Mike Brown -- kicked the news media into high gear by predicting the existence of Planet Nine, a new, but as-yet unseen planet in the outer solar system. Their trans-Neptunian world has an orbital period of about 20,000 years, and a super-Earth mass more than sufficient to bring the planet count back up to nine.
Batygin and Brown's paper, has been downloaded more than half a million times, and presents indirect dynamical evidence for Planet Nine. Its presence is inferred through the gravitational sculpting that it has produced in the trajectories of the most distant Pluto-like worlds that lie beyond Neptune's orbit.
Follow-up papers by a range of authors have added a mixture of credibility, detail, and skepticism to the Planet Nine hypothesis. During the past two years, Planet Nine has been invoked as an explanation for the generation of highly inclined Kuiper belt objects such as Drac and Niku, it has been shown that it can account for curious orbital commensurabilities among the most distant members of the Kuipier Belt, and it has been hypothesized that it can explain the 6-degree tilt of the planetary orbits relative to the Sun's equator. If it does exist, the most likely sky location for Planet Nine is roughly RA=2h, Dec=0 deg, near aphelion (although the uncertainty on this direction is substantial). The favored area of the sky is optimally visible during late autumn for a planet at opposition. At the most probable current location, the planet's current distance would be r~950 AU, and the expected V magnitude is 22.4. A number of groups have engaged in the hunt, and there is something of an emerging consensus that if the planet exists to be found, it'll be found sooner rather than later. As an example, Mike Brown gave sixteen months fifteen months ago. This fourth update to our original, now closed, Planet Nine question is thus in order:
Will the discovery by direct observation of a new solar system planet having characteristics substantially similar to those described in the Batygin-Brown paper, be announced in a peer-reviewed paper prior to July 1, 2019?
(For this question to resolve as "Yes", the new solar system planet should have an inferred radius larger than that of Earth, an orbital period greater than 5,000 years, and an orbital eccentricity e > 0.25). | true | 2018-12-31 | Will Planet Nine be Discovered by mid-2019? | metaculus | 0 |
2018-11-13 | 2018-01-21 | [] | binary | [["2018-01-24", 0.44], ["2018-01-24", 0.44], ["2018-01-24", 0.42], ["2018-01-24", 0.38], ["2018-01-25", 0.38], ["2018-01-25", 0.36], ["2018-01-25", 0.308], ["2018-01-25", 0.308], ["2018-01-25", 0.296], ["2018-01-25", 0.296], ["2018-01-25", 0.315], ["2018-01-25", 0.315], ["2018-01-25", 0.302], ["2018-01-25", 0.297], ["2018-01-25", 0.297], ["2018-01-25", 0.307], ["2018-01-26", 0.29], ["2018-01-26", 0.301], ["2018-01-26", 0.301], ["2018-01-26", 0.312], ["2018-01-26", 0.312], ["2018-01-26", 0.313], ["2018-01-26", 0.305], ["2018-01-26", 0.296], ["2018-01-26", 0.279], ["2018-01-27", 0.279], ["2018-01-27", 0.313], ["2018-01-27", 0.313], ["2018-01-27", 0.313], ["2018-01-27", 0.315], ["2018-01-28", 0.315], ["2018-01-28", 0.307], ["2018-01-29", 0.309], ["2018-01-29", 0.306], ["2018-01-29", 0.315], ["2018-01-29", 0.302], ["2018-01-30", 0.302], ["2018-01-30", 0.298], ["2018-01-30", 0.298], ["2018-01-31", 0.295], ["2018-01-31", 0.295], ["2018-02-01", 0.294], ["2018-02-01", 0.294], ["2018-02-01", 0.294], ["2018-02-02", 0.29], ["2018-02-03", 0.286], ["2018-02-03", 0.286], ["2018-02-04", 0.288], ["2018-02-04", 0.285], ["2018-02-04", 0.292], ["2018-02-04", 0.305], ["2018-02-05", 0.311], ["2018-02-08", 0.313], ["2018-02-09", 0.313], ["2018-02-09", 0.311], ["2018-02-11", 0.311], ["2018-02-14", 0.309], ["2018-02-21", 0.309], ["2018-02-22", 0.309], ["2018-02-24", 0.312], ["2018-02-25", 0.312], ["2018-02-25", 0.314]] | https://www.metaculus.com/api2/questions/619/ | Not applicable/available for this question. | Economics & Business | Amazon recently announced plans to build "HQ2", a second headquarters in North America. As detailed in a number of news articles, cities across the continent scrambled to promote themselves as the ideal location; the selected region will absorb a $5 billion investment and see the creation of up to 50,000 new jobs over the next two decades. It is widely expected that the winning locale will offer significant tax incentives, but a range of tangible and intangible factors will likely play into the final selection.
Amazon recently announced a list of twenty finalist cities and metro areas chosen from a list of 238 submitted bids. The selections lean heavily on the Midwest and Eastern Seaboard, and with the exception of Toronto, are all in the United States.
The downselect has naturally led to considerable speculation regarding Amazon's final choice. At the time of this question's creation, the Irish betting website PaddyPower has Boston, Atlanta and Austin in the lead, with 2/1, 5/1, and 11/2 payoffs respectively, and with other finalists having odds ranging from 8/1 to 20/1. Given the desirable simplicity of a binary resolution, and given the nice ring of "Austin or Boston?", we ask:
Will Austin TX or Boston MA be chosen as the site for Amazon's HQ2?
Resolution is by official Amazon announcement, and resolves as positive if the HQ is located in the Austin TX, or Boston MA Metropolitan Statistical Area | true | 2018-03-01 | Will Amazon choose either Austin or Boston for its HQ2? | metaculus | 0 |