The LGBTQ movement has made [massive strides](https://www.cnn.com/2015/06/19/us/lgbt-rights-milestones-fast-facts/index.html) during the 21st century in the United States. Less than 60 years ago engaging in consensual homosexual acts in private was [illegal](http://articles.chicagotribune.com/1989-06-26/news/8902120553_1_gay-bar-anti-gay-activists-first-openly-gay-supervisor) in parts of the country. But progress has been undeniable. In 2015 the U.S. Supreme Court [legalized gay marriage](https://www.cnn.com/2015/06/26/politics/supreme-court-same-sex-marriage-ruling/index.html) just seven years after the country elected its first President who was not a straight white male. 

**Will an openly LGBTQ person be elected President of the United States by 2041?**

New resolution criteria:

This question resolves positively if an openly LGBTQ candidate is elected president before 2041. The candidate must, during the campaign, either: 

 + Publicly identify as something else than cisgender.
 + Publicly identify as something else than heterosexual.

This question will resolve negatively if all candidates elected president by 2041 identify as both cisgender and heterosexual.

Resolution will be by credible media reports.

Old resolution criteria:

This question resolves positively if an openly LGBTQ candidate is elected president before 2041. The candidate must be lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender, or queer. This question will resolve negatively if no openly LGBTQ candidate is elected president by 2041. An ambiguous resolution will result if a candidates sexuality is brought forth during their campaign from a source other than themselves and they continue to win the presidency.

Will an openly LGBTQ person be elected President of the United States by 2041?

_This is one of several questions in this tournament focused on nuclear proliferation, force sizes, or yields. See [here](https://www.metaculus.com/questions/8126/nuclear-proliferation-force-sizes--yields/) for a list of such questions and some discussion of these topics._

Currently, nine states possess nuclear weapons. Below is a list of the estimated number of nuclear warheads in each if those states as of May 2021 (according to [the Federation of American Scientists](https://fas.org/issues/nuclear-weapons/status-world-nuclear-forces/)). 

- Russia: 6,257 nuclear warheads
- US: 5,550 nuclear warheads
- China: 350 nuclear warheads
- France: 290 nuclear warheads
- UK: 225 nuclear warheads
- Pakistan: 165 nuclear warheads
- India: 160 nuclear warheads
- Israel: 90 nuclear warheads
- North Korea: sufficient fissile materials for 45 nuclear warheads ("The[ir] number of assembled warheads is unknown, but lower")

***Will at least two states each increase the size of their nuclear weapons arsenals by at least 25% by 2024?***

This question resolves positively if the FAS website shows, at any time between 2021-10-01 and 2023-12-31, that two or more states each have arsenals 25% higher than the estimates given above (i.e., 25% higher than FAS's estimates from May 2021). This includes deployed, reserve/nondeployed, and retired (but still intact) warheads, and both strategic and nonstrategic weapons. If a state that had no nuclear weapons when this question opened gains an arsenal of at least one assembled nuclear weapon, that would be counted as a state increasing its stockpile size by at least 25%.

In the case of North Korea, the "size of their nuclear stockpile" will refer to the number of warheads that could be assembled using the fissile material they've produced, whether the warheads have been assembled or not.

[fine-print]
If FAS publish no estimates during the whole of 2023, then this question will resolve ambiguously. 

No attempt will be made to distinguish actual increases in arsenal sizes from increases in estimates due to FAS changing their estimation methods or learning new information about what was already true in May 2021. This is mostly for simplicity, but also partly because _some_ implications are the same whether (a) actual increases occur or (b) our current information is an underestimate.
[/fine-print]

Will at least two states each increase the size of their nuclear weapons arsenals by at least 25% by 2024?

Please Note: PredictIt added a supplementary comment at the bottom of the Rules on 03/09/2021.
The contract that resolves to Yes shall be that which identifies the U.S. state that holds the first statewide primary election for the award or selection of delegates to determine the nominee of the Democratic Party in the 2024 presidential election. 
Events run by the Democratic Party, such as caucuses or conventions, and "beauty contest" primaries where no delegates will be selected or awarded, shall not be considered when resolving this market.
The timing of absentee, mail-in or other options that may be available prior to the date of the primary election shall not be considered when resolving this market.
Should two or more states hold a primary election on the same calendar day, this market shall resolve for the state ranked first when qualifying states are ordered alphabetically.
Additional contracts identifying states not listed at the time of launch of this market may be added at any time prior to settlement.
PredictIt’s decisions and determinations under this rule shall be at PredictIt’s sole discretion and shall be final.

Supplementary Comment(s)

Created On: 03/09/2021 12:40 PM (ET)
In response to trader inquiry: The second paragraph of the Rules means that the following shall not be considered when resolving this market:
* Events run by the Democratic Party, such as caucuses or conventions; and
* "Beauty contest" primaries where no delegates will be selected or awarded


South Carolina

New Hampshire

Iowa

Nevada

New Jersey

Minnesota

Michigan

Which state will hold the first Democratic primary for the 2024 nominee?

This market will expire the first 2:05 PM ET following the release of a Federal Reserve statement for their || Meeting || meeting or one week following the last day of that meeting.. The resolution source is: undefined (undefined)

Will the upper bound of the federal funds rate be above 4.00% following the Fed's February meeting?

The [Navier-Stokes existence and smoothness conjecture](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Navier%E2%80%93Stokes_existence_and_smoothness) is an important open problem in fluid dynamics and the theory of partial differential equations. It's been designated as one of the Clay Institute's Millennium Prize Problems in 2000 and there is a 1 million dollar bounty available for either proving or disproving the conjecture. In the official introduction to the problem [here](https://www.claymath.org/sites/default/files/navierstokes.pdf), the Clay Institute splits the problem into four statements A, B, C and D; and the problem is considered to have been settled if *any one* of them is proven.

Importantly for this question, the statements A and C are about the Navier-Stokes equations defined on the noncompact space $ \mathbb R^3 $, while B and D are about the equations defined on the compact torus $ (\mathbb R/\mathbb Z)^3 $.

***Will the existence and smoothness properties of the Navier-Stokes equations in three dimensions turn out to depend on the compactness of the universe over which they are defined?***

This question resolves positively if before the resolution date of the question there are proofs of *either* both A and D *or* both B and C. It resolves negatively if there are proofs of *either* both A and B *or* both C and D. If neither event takes place before the resolution date of the question, the question resolves ambiguously.

Will the existence and smoothness properties of the Navier-Stokes equations in three dimensions turn out to depend on the compactness of the universe over which they are defined?

Company valuations can take off very quickly: Apple was valued at around [$100 billion in mid 2007](https://www.macrotrends.net/stocks/charts/AAPL/apple/market-cap), and so it has taken the company roughly 11 years to grow its market capitalisation by a factor of ten. However, one year before it first hit $1 trillion, it was worth ~$0.8 trillion (which would have resolved a similar question negative).

Amazon's rise was even more impressive. Amazon has grown from $100 bn to $1 trillion [in just over 6 years](https://www.macrotrends.net/stocks/charts/AMZN/amazon/market-cap). And one year before it hit $1 trillion, it was worth ~0.46 trillion (which would have resolved a similar question positive).

An important consideration in how to approach the [AI alignment problem](https://mapandterritory.org/formally-stating-the-ai-alignment-problem-fe7a6e3e5991) is the speed of the takeoff from massively subhuman AI to massively superhuman AI.

Paul Christiano [suggests](https://sideways-view.com/2018/02/24/takeoff-speeds/) operationalising the takeoff takeoff speed of AI in terms of economic growth. That is, if there is a rapid transition from massively subhuman AI to massively superhuman AI, we would expect accelerated economic growth. One indicator of the rate of economic growth is the growth in company valuations.


**Will the first publicly traded company to have a $10 trillion market cap be worth at least double what it was worth 1 year before reaching $10 trillion?**

___

**Resolution**

This resolves when a company whose shares can be bought and sold on a stock exchange achieves a market capitalisation of $10 trillion (adjusted to 2018 prices), AND it was worth less than or equal to $5 trillion one year before (also in 2018 prices). The question will refer to [Yahoo Finance](https://finance.yahoo.com/)'s data, or any other reputable financial data service.

When the first company reaches a $10 trillion market cap, will it be worth at least double what it was the year before?

The video game company valve has multiple franchises all ending with their number 2 game and it is well known joke in the gaming community that valve will never create a game with the number 3 in the title.

Franchises that already are at the number 2: "Half Life 2", "Portal 2",
"Left 4 Dead 2", "Team Fortress 2" and "Dota 2".

This question resolves positive if Valve releases before 2030-01-01 a game made by Valve that has "3" (or anything else that means 3) in its title. It resolves negative otherwise, including if Valve ceases operating.

Will Valve release a game before 2030 with 3 in the Title?

The market closes at 10:00 AM on the day of the expected release of the inflation data for || Date ||.. The resolution source is: undefined (undefined)

What will the economy look like in December?

The United Kingdom (UK) famously voted to leave the European Union in 2015 with a surprise leave vote ([Brexit](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brexit)). It was legally set in motion in 2019 by Conservative prime minister Boris Johnson:

>Brexit (/ˈbrɛksɪt, ˈbrɛɡzɪt/;[1] a portmanteau of "British" and "exit") is the withdrawal of the United Kingdom (UK) from the European Union (EU). Following a UK-wide referendum in June 2016, in which 52% voted to leave and 48% voted to remain in the EU, the UK Government which was then led by Theresa May formally declared the country's withdrawal on 29 March 2017, beginning the Brexit process. The withdrawal was originally scheduled for 29 March 2019 but was then delayed by deadlock in the UK Parliament after the June 2017 general election resulted in an unexpected hung parliament, which then led to three subsequent extensions of the Article 50 process. The deadlock was only resolved after a subsequent general election was held in December 2019. Following the outcome, the UK Parliament finally ratified the withdrawal agreement, and the UK left the EU at 11 p.m. GMT on 31 January 2020. This began a transition period that is set to end on 31 December 2020, during which the UK and EU are negotiating their future relationship.[2] The UK remains subject to EU law and remains part of the EU customs union and single market during the transition, but is no longer part of the EU's political bodies or institutions.[3][4] 

However, there seems to be nothing preventing a new government from having the UK rejoin the union. In fact, [various](https://www.theatlantic.com/international/archive/2020/02/britain-brexit-rejoin-eu-boris-johnson/606190/) [people](https://blogs.lse.ac.uk/brexit/2020/01/23/membership-2-0-what-the-uk-rejoining-the-eu-would-involve/) [have](https://www.prospectmagazine.co.uk/magazine/should-we-rejoin-the-eu-now-brexit-will-hutton-patience-wheatcroft) [written](https://www.businessinsider.com/brexit-poll-most-british-people-want-to-rejoin-eu-2020-6) on this [already](https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/brexit-eu-rejoin-future-uk-leave-countries-a9308081.html), [even predicting it will happen in "a decade's time"](https://www.politico.eu/article/how-britain-rejoins-the-eu-in-a-decades-time/). The question is: **Will the UK rejoin the European Union before 2030?**

- Resolves positively if the future UK government and parliament legally rejoins the union.



- If the EU ceases to exist before resolution, this question resolves *negatively*

- If the EU changes its name or function, and the UK rejoins this new body, the question resolves *positively*

Will the United Kingdom rejoin the European Union before 2030?

The question [Date first AGI is publicly known.](https://www.metaculus.com/questions/3479/when-will-the-first-artificial-general-intelligence-system-be-devised-tested-and-publicly-known-of/) asks _When will the first AGI be first developed and demonstrated?_.

Today, research groups at both for-profit corporations and universities are working on developing general reasoning systems. Other possible institutions might be nationalized corporations, governments generally, and non-profit organizations.


***Will the research group that is responsible for developing the first AGI be part of a government project?***

This question will resolve positively if the AI system that resolves the question [Date first AGI is publicly known.](https://www.metaculus.com/questions/3479/when-will-the-first-artificial-general-intelligence-system-be-devised-tested-and-publicly-known-of/) was developed by a research group working for a government project.

If the respective AI system is developed under a collaborative effort between two or more different institutions, the question resolves positively for both. For example, if OpenAI and UC Berkeley's CHAI had joined forces for the responsible project, this would count for both for-profit corporation and university. 

**Sister questions**

- [Nationalized organization develops first AGI](https://www.metaculus.com/questions/8325/nationalized-organization-develops-first-agi/)
- [Non-profit organization develops first AGI](https://www.metaculus.com/questions/8328/non-profit-organization-develops-first-agi/)
- [University group develops first AGI](https://www.metaculus.com/questions/8326/university-group-develops-first-agi/)
- [Corporation develops first AGI](https://www.metaculus.com/questions/8324/corporation-develops-first-agi/)

Will the research group that is responsible for developing the first AGI be part of a government project?

Despite our best efforts, Earth is still the only known planet in the universe to harbor any kind of life. Though plenty of our attention in this hunt has been focused on studying potentially habitable exoplanets, this question is concerned with the likelihood of finding [extraterrestrial life](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Extraterrestrial_life#Planetary_habitability_in_the_Solar_System) in our own cosmic backyard.

***Will any conclusive evidence for extraterrestrial life, past or present, be discovered within our Solar System by 2050?***

This question will resolve as **Yes** if, at any point between January 1, 2020 to January 1, 2050, a scientific consensus is reached that life exists or has existed anywhere in our Solar System besides Earth, as judged by Metaculus Admins.

For this question, we exclude any extra-terrestrial life which has been placed outside Earth through intentional or unintentional human activity.  Otherwise, it is not necessary for ET life to have a separate origin from Earth life (see the [panspermia hypothesis](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Panspermia)).

Will any conclusive evidence for extraterrestrial life, past or present, be discovered within our Solar System by 2050?

Contact lens Augmented Reality (AR) has been depicted in various futurist scenarios, like May-raz and Lazo's award-winning, 8 min film [Sight (2012)](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=z5KRTr-QRLk).

Researchers like University of Washington Professor Babak Amir Parviz have [been working on the science and technology since at least 2009](http://spectrum.ieee.org/biomedical/bionics/augmented-reality-in-a-contact-lens/0), and 
companies like Innovega (Bellvue, WA) are [working on bringing these out](http://innovega-inc.com/new-architecture.php).

Will these be popular among at least "innovators" by 2025?  Let's define innovators as the first 2.5 percent of a group to adopt a new idea, and assume our reasonably affluent global tech user group is at least 100 million in 2025

**Will 2.5 million of these (or other) users (for example, soldiers) use contact lenses for augmented reality, at least occasionally (1+ day a week), by the end of 2025**

Resolution will be positive if credible media or company statements indicate > 2.5 million regular users of augmented reality contact lenses by Dec 31, 2025.




Contact lenses for augmented reality in use by innovators before 2026?

Craig J Mundie and Eric Schmidt summarize their reasons for taking the bet [here](http://longbets.org/4/).

If the Long Now Foundation declares Craig J Mundie the winner, this question resolves positively. If they declare Eric Schmidt the winner, this question resolves negatively.

Longbets series: By 2030, will commercial passengers routinely fly in pilotless planes?

The market will expire at the sooner of the first 10:00 AM following the release of the data, or one week following the scheduled release of the data (scheduled for January 12, 2023). The market will always close on 8:25 AM on the scheduled day of the data release (January 12, 2023). Please note: the Expiration Value is the single-decimal value published at the Source Agency.. The resolution source is: undefined (undefined)

Will CPI rise more than 0.1% in December 2022?

The United States has employed military conscription during five separate conflicts in American history, most recently in the Vietnam war, ending in 1973. If the United States enters another large war, it might begin conscripting soldiers once again.

This question resolves positively if *any* military personnel\* are conscripted$^†$ for the military in the United States before January 1st, 2025. Otherwise, it resolves negatively.

---

\* "military personnel" here includes the Coast Guard.

$^†$ "conscription" here does not include the Individual Ready Reserve or Stop-Loss activation.

Will the United States institute a military draft by 2025?

Xi Jinping is currently nearing the end of his second term as CCP General Secretary and is expected to make a bid for a third term and win it with a [92% chance according to a current Metaculus question](https://www.metaculus.com/questions/1468/will-xi-jinping-keep-leading-china-past-2022/). There is considerable speculation that Xi will pave the way for a much longer tenure [akin to the tenure of Mao Zedong and Deng Xiaping](https://www.ft.com/content/71b165a6-052d-4d7d-9006-e2e757f40d98). Having China ruled by a single figure with a potentially unlimited tenure might have considerable ramifications for a variety of topics ranging from the West's China policy to global security concerns.

***Will Xi Jinping continue leading China in 2030?***

This question will resolve positive if either:

 *  Xi is CCP General Secretary on 1 January, 2030. 
 *  Xi is paramount leader of China on 1 January, 2030. 
 *  Xi is de facto leader of China on 1 January, 2030. 

This question will resolve negative if: 

 * Any other person is leader on 1 January, 2030. 

This question will resolve ambiguous if:

 * China ceases to exist as the political entity it is right now.

Will Xi Jinping continue leading China in 2030?

This market will be settled based on the first official announcement of the next permanent Labour Party leader after Keir Starmer, as chosen by a Labour Party leadership contest. Betfair reserves the right to suspend, cancel unmatched bets and turn in-play or re-open this market as and when information becomes available to it. Additional runners may be added upon request. In the event of any ambiguity over an announcement, Betfair may determine, using its reasonable discretion, how to settle the market based on all the information available to it at the relevant time. Betfair reserves the right to wait for further official announcements before the market is settled. Betfair will not be responsible for suspending the market when an official announcement is made by The Labour Party. However, Betfair will suspend the market as soon as it becomes aware of an official announcement. Betfair expressly reserves the right to suspend and/or void any and all bets on this market at any time in the event that Betfair is not satisfied (in its absolute discretion) with the certainty of the outcome.

Andy Burnham

Wes Streeting

Lisa Nandy

Angela Rayner

Yvette Cooper

Rachel Reeves

Bridget Phillipson

Jess Phillips

Rosena Allin-Khan

Sadiq Khan

Emily Thornberry

David Lammy

Dan Jarvis

Stella Creasy

Louise Haigh

Zarah Sultana

David Miliband

Stephen Kinnock

Jonathan Ashworth

Chris Bryant

Lucy Powell

Anneliese Dodds

Ed Balls

Clive Lewis

Jonathan Reynolds

Nick Thomas-Symonds

Jim McMahon

Jon Trickett

Hilary Benn

Richard Burgon

Dan Carden

Chi Onwurah

Barry Gardiner

Jeremy Corbyn

Liz Kendall

Rebecca Long-Bailey

Seema Malhotra

Matthew Pennycook

Ian Lavery

Laura Pidcock

Janet Daby

Angela Eagle

Kate Osamor

Nia Griffith

Cat Smith

Heidi Alexander

Helena Dollimore

Satvir Kaur

Tulip Siddiq

Peter Kyle

Darren Jones

Alison McGovern

Stephen Morgan

Sarah Jones

Who will be the next permanent leader of the Labour Party, after Keir Starmer?

[The Open Philanthropy Project](https://www.openphilanthropy.org/) makes charitable grants based on what could be described as [effective altruist principles](https://www.openphilanthropy.org/about/vision-and-values): "global humanitarianism", "risk tolerance and patience", and "action in the face of humanity".

More broadly, the justification for a grant could be considered to fall under "effective altruist principles" if it is made due to a belief that it represents among the best uses of money for improving the world, without regard to favoring a particular group, nation, species, etc., and without regard to the grantmaker's personal connection to or feelings about the cause.

***In 2031, will at least 90% of Open Philanthropy Project grant money be directed using effective altruist principles?***

This question will resolve as **Yes** if in 2031, at least 90% of Open Philanthropy Project grants, on a dollar-weighted basis, are directed according to Effective Altruist principles.  Open Phil's grant writups (such as this [example](https://www.openphilanthropy.org/focus/global-catastrophic-risks/biosecurity/center-for-population-level-bioethics-general-support)), generally refer to cause reports (such as [here](https://www.openphilanthropy.org/research/cause-reports/biosecurity)), and the cause reports provide justification for why the cause is a high priority under effective altruist principles.

Judging this question affirmatively does not require that people agree on whether Open Phil is succeeding according EA principles, only that it is attempting to follow them. People can reasonably disagree about which causes are the most effective.

If Open Phil makes less than $1 million in grants in 2031, this question will resolve as **Ambiguous.**

In 2031, will at least 90% of Open Philanthropy Project grant money be directed using effective altruist principles?

Pre-covid, several [forecasters](https://carbontracker.org/reports/2020-vision-why-you-should-see-the-fossil-fuel-peak-coming/) expected peak oil consumption to be in the 2020s. Now, in light of plummeting 2020 consumption, [several energy forecasters](https://carbontracker.org/was-2019-the-peak-of-the-fossil-fuel-era/) have concluded that perhaps the peak was 2019. 

According to the EIA, [2019 usage was 100.87 mb/day](https://www.eia.gov/outlooks/steo/report/global_oil.php) (under total world consumption of petroleum and other liquids).

***Will global oil consumption over the 2020-2025 period be lower than in 2019?***

This question will resolve as **Yes** if no year from 2020-2025 (inclusive) has greater global oil consumption than 2019 according to the EIA.
 
It will resolve negatively if any of those 6 years has greater consumption. 
It will resolve ambiguous if the EIA does not post consumption data for 2025 by the end of 2026, and no comparably authoritative source can be found (for which that source's 2019 data would be necessary).

Will global oil consumption over the 2020-2025 period be lower than in 2019?

In October 2017, Messaging Extraterrestrial Intelligence International (METI) transmitted a [signal into space](https://www.cnet.com/news/seti-space-aliens-extra-terrestrial-intelligence-luytens-star-gj-273/) designed to let other civilizations know we're here.

The message, transmitted to a [red dwarf star](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Luyten%27s_Star) 12 light-years from Earth and contains information on human understanding of science, math and time. 

In March 2017, a planet three times the mass of Earth within the habitable zone was discovered orbiting the star. If there's anyone on that planet who receives the message, their reply could arrive as early as 2042.

***Will we detect a message originating from Luyten's Star before 2046?***

This question will resolve as positive if a signal of unambiguously intelligent and extraterrestrial origin originating from Luyten's Star is detected on or near Earth on or before December 31, 2045.

Will we detect a message originating from Luyten's Star before 2046?

Extreme poverty is defined as living on less than $1.90 a day, measured in 2011 Purchasing Power Parity prices [(World Bank, 2017)](https://openknowledge.worldbank.org/bitstream/handle/10986/25141/9781464809613.pdf). In 2015, 9.98% of the World's population or 734.5 million people lived in extreme poverty [(World Bank, 2019)](http://documents.worldbank.org/curated/en/344401569259571927/pdf/September-2019-PovcalNet-Update-Whats-New.pdf).

According to [World Bank Data](https://www.gapminder.org/tools/?from=world#$chart-type=bubbles&state$time$value=2006&delay:121.71612903225821;&entities$;&marker$select@;&opacitySelectDim:0.3&axis_x$use=indicator&which=income_per_person_gdppercapita_ppp_inflation_adjusted&scaleType=log&zoomedMin=282&zoomedMax=119849&domainMin:null&domainMax:null;&axis_y$use=indicator&which=extreme_poverty_percent_people_below_190_a_day&scaleType=linear&zoomedMin=0&zoomedMax=93&domainMin:null&domainMax:null;&size$use=indicator&which=population_total&extent@:0.022083333333333333&:0.4083333333333333;&domainMin:null&domainMax:null;&color$use=property&which=world_6region;;;&ui$chart$trails:false), extreme poverty has been declining by roughly 1% per year since the 1980's. However, [there is evidence](https://www.worldbank.org/en/news/press-release/2018/09/19/decline-of-global-extreme-poverty-continues-but-has-slowed-world-bank) that the decline in global extreme poverty has been slowing.

**Will we see fewer than 734.5M people in extreme poverty, worldwide in the year 2020, according to World Bank estimates?**

This question resolves positively if the first estimates of the number in extreme poverty in the year 2020, published by the World Bank, is below 734.5M. In case the numbers are not published by the World Bank before the end of 2025, figures from other data sources, such as those listed on the [data sources page](https://www.metaculus.com/help/prediction-resources/#data-sources), may be consulted.

Will the number of people in extreme poverty in 2020 be lower than the number in 2015?

What the first offensive nuclear detonation would look like is relevant both for understanding the total risk posed by nuclear weapons and for understanding how to reduce that risk. One question is whether the first detonation would be of a strategic or non-strategic nuclear weapon. [Non-strategic nuclear weapons](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tactical_nuclear_weapon) (also known as tactical nuclear weapons) are typically lower yield, shorter-range, and intended for detonating closer to friendly forces or friendly territory than strategic nuclear weapons. There is no exact definition on weapon yields or ranges, as some non-strategic weapons can be used in a strategic context, and vice versa.

***Will the first offensive nuclear detonation by 2024 be of a nonstrategic nuclear weapon, if there's an offensive detonation by then?***

The question resolves positively if there is a reputable source that provides evidence that the first offensive nuclear detonation between this question opening and 2024 was a detonation of a nonstrategic nuclear weapon. This question resolves negatively if that doesn't occur but there's an offensive nuclear detonation somewhere in the world by 2024. This question resolves ambiguously if no offensive nuclear detonation occurs before 2024.


For the purposes of this question, a strategic nuclear weapon is a weapon designed mostly to be targeted at the enemy interior (away from the war front) against military bases, cities, towns, arms industries, and other hardened or larger-area targets, while a non-strategic nuclear is a nuclear weapon designed mostly to be used on a battlefield, near friendly forces, or on or near friendly territory.  But note that this question is about the type of weapon, not the type of target; it's conceivable that a non-strategic weapon could be used against the sort of target strategic weapons are designed for or vice versa.


The military significance or stated purpose of the strike is not taken into consideration for this question (except that [detonations for testing purposes](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nuclear_weapons_testing) and [peaceful nuclear explosions](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Peaceful_nuclear_explosion) are not counted towards positive resolution). 


For the purposes of this question, offensive nuclear detonations include deliberate, inadvertent, or accidental/unauthorised detonations (see the fine print for definitions) of state or nonstate nuclear weapons.

**See also:**

* [Will the first offensive nuclear detonation by 2024 be against a battlefield target, if there's an offensive detonation anywhere by then?](https://www.metaculus.com/questions/8585/bt-as-the-first-nuclear-detonation-by-2024/)

* [Will the first offensive nuclear detonation by 2024 be on city, if there's an offensive detonation anywhere by then?](https://www.metaculus.com/questions/8586/city-as-the-first-nuclear-detonation-target/)

[fine-print]
Test detonations and peaceful nuclear explosions are defined as detonations which are claimed as being a test or a peaceful nuclear explosion by an official government communication within 30 days of the event, without this being disputed by reliable media, state reports, or multinational reports. If information is unclear, then resolution will be left up to Metaculus admins.


In a deliberate detonation, the attacking nation decides to launch one or more nuclear weapons either in response to a genuine nuclear attack or without believing that it is under nuclear attack. “In an inadvertent detonation, the attacking nation mistakenly concludes that it is under nuclear attack and launches one or more nuclear weapons in what it believes is a counterattack” [(Barrett et al., 2013)](http://scienceandglobalsecurity.org/archive/sgs21barrett.pdf). “In an accidental or unauthorized launch or detonation, system safeguards or procedures to maintain control over nuclear weapons fail in such a way that a nuclear weapon or missile launches or explodes without direction from leaders” [(Barrett et al., 2013)](http://scienceandglobalsecurity.org/archive/sgs21barrett.pdf).
[/fine-print]

Will the first offensive nuclear detonation by 2024 be of a nonstrategic nuclear weapon, if there's an offensive detonation by then?

A [donor-advised fund](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Donor-advised_fund) (DAF) is "a charitable giving vehicle administered by a public charity created to manage charitable donations on behalf of organizations, families, or individuals." The sponsoring organization of a fund—often a subsidiary of a brokerage firm such as [Fidelity Charitable](https://www.fidelitycharitable.org/) or [Schwab Charitable](https://www.schwabcharitable.org/)—is a 501(c)(3) registered charity that accepts tax-deductible donations from the creator of the DAF. The creator can then make grant recommendations to the sponsoring organization.

Sponsoring organizations legally own any donated money, and have no obligation to abide by grant recommendations. There have been cases in the past of DAFs [refusing to use donated money as directed](https://www.insidephilanthropy.com/home/2016/1/3/donor-advised-funds-drawbacks)[1] or using donated money [for its own benefit](https://www.philanthropy.com/article/Nevada-Court-Says/212899). To my knowledge, no large reputable DAF has ever done this.

**What is the probability that at least 10% of all funds held in DAFs will be expropriated by 2100?**

Funds are considered expropriated if:

- The DAF refuses to make a grant recommendation, insofar as the grant recommendation is legal.
- The DAF spends donated money on purposes other than a donor's recommendation, not including ordinary account expenses[2].
- The DAF begins charging unreasonable expenses (e.g., a 5% annual fee).
- An outside party, such as the US government, seizes control of all or a substantial portion of the money (including by taxation).

The following situations do not qualify as expropriation:

- The US government imposes a distribution requirement, such as the 5% annual distribution requirement that foundations must follow.
- The DAF refuses to abide by a grant recommendation because it legally cannot, e.g., because the would-be grant recipient is not a 501(c)(3).
- The DAF forcibly closes (e.g., due to Fidelity Charitable going bankrupt), but lets donors decide how to grant all remaining money.

[1] Article is paywalled, but the gist is that the Jewish Community Foundation of Los Angeles refused to comply with a donor's request to donate to a charity supporting Palestine.

[2] At present, Fidelity Charitable charges a 0.6% annual fee. Most other DAFs charge similar fees.

Will a total sum amounting to at least 10% of the money in all US DAFs be expropriated by 2100?

Oil prices have fallen from historic highs reached after Russia&#39;s invasion of Ukraine, but the Biden administration is pushing for more domestic production ([Axios](https://www.axios.com/2022/12/20/biden-administration-strategic-petroleum-reserve), [US News &amp; World Report](https://www.usnews.com/news/top-news/articles/2022-12-19/u-s-poised-to-become-net-exporter-of-crude-oil-in-2023), [NASDAQ](https://www.nasdaq.com/articles/shale-oil-wraps-up-an-underwhelming-year-girds-for-lower-growth-1)). The outcome will be determined using the "4-Week Avg U.S. Field Production of Crude Oil" data (which is displayed in thousands of barrels per day) as reported by the Energy Information Administration (EIA) ([EIA](https://www.eia.gov/dnav/pet/hist/LeafHandler.ashx?n=pet&amp;s=wcrfpus2&amp;f=4)). A weekly figure must have its "End Date" between 6 January 2023 and 29 December 2023 to count. On 6 December 2022, the EIA forecasted domestic production would increase to 12.34 million barrels per day in 2023 ([EIA Short-term Energy Outlook - December 2022](https://www.eia.gov/outlooks/steo/archives/dec22.pdf)).
Confused? Check our [FAQ](https://www.gjopen.com/faq#question) or [ask us for help](mailto:clarifications@goodjudgment.com?subject=Question%20Clarification). To learn more about Good Judgment and Superforecasting, [click here](https://goodjudgment.com/).
To learn more about how you can become a Superforecaster, [see here](https://goodjudgment.com/how-to-become-a-superforecaster/). For other posts from our Insights blog, [click here](https://goodjudgment.com/insights/).


Less than 12,000 thousand b/d

Between 12,000 and 12,400 thousand b/d, inclusive

More than 12,400 but less than 12,800 thousand b/d

Between 12,800 and 13,200 thousand b/d, inclusive

More than 13,200 thousand b/d

Between 6 January 2023 and 29 December 2023, what will be the highest four-week average of US field production of crude oil?

[Rich Communication Services (RCS)](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rich_Communication_Services) is a protocol allowing more robust and comprehensive support for texting and file sharing, especially for individuals with different phone models and carriers. It is largely seen as a successor to SMS and MMS technologies.

There has been a great deal of pressure from regulators, competitors, and consumers for Apple to adopt RCS, [which they have consistently rejected in favor of their proprietary iMessage service.](https://www.theverge.com/2022/9/7/23342243/tim-cook-apple-rcs-imessage-android-iphone-compatibility)

Adopting RCS would allow iPhone users to communicate via text message with other phone users in a more customer-friendly manner.

***Will Apple adopt RCS technology for iPhones before 2026?***

If by December 31, 2025, Apple has added RCS technology for text messaging to at least one model of mass-market consumer mobile phones available for purchase, this question will resolve as **Yes**. Otherwise, this question will resolve as **No**.

Will Apple adopt RCS technology for iPhones before 2026?

Will Predictit be in operation in the US past February 15th, 2023? The [CFTC has withdrawn](https://www.cftc.gov/PressRoom/PressReleases/8567-22) Predictit's No-action letter, with an order to wind down all related and remaining listed contracts and positions comprising all associated open interest in such market no later than 11:59 p.m. (EDT) on February 15, 2023. This market will resolve as yes if (1) the CFTC reverses this decision, and reinstates Predictit's no-action letter (thus, an early resolution is possible), (2) Predictit continues to operate in the US and take bets after February 15th, 2023. This could happen if, for example, the CFTC grants an extension of the deadline. Note that if they, for example, move offshore, and operate without the CFTC's blessing, this market will still resolve No, even if a few Americans continue to use the site. Also, if they have to close down temporarily (for longer than 48 hours) after which they plan to re-open under a different legal framework, then this market will still resolve as "No". 
There are "maker subsidies" and "taker fees" on this market. The maker subsidies are .025 times the price, times the potential profit (e.g., Maker Subsidy per share = .025*Price/100*(1-Price/100)). The taker fees are .075 times the price, times the potential profit (e.g., Taker Fee per share = .075*Price/100*(1-Price/100)). Thus, the maker subsidy to buy 100 shares at 20 cents would be: 100*.025*(20/100)*(80/100) = $0.40, and the taker fee would be $1.20. The full fee schedule [is here](http://insightprediction.com/page/FAQ#Fee-Schedule). End Date: 2/16/2023
Update: Note that if Predictit continues to operate, but does not take new bets for a period of at least 48 hours, then this will resolve as "No". 




Will Predictit Survive?

This is one of several questions in this tournament focused on intersections between nuclear risk and AI. See [here](https://www.metaculus.com/questions/8531/intersections-between-nuclear-risk-and-ai/) for a list of such questions and some discussion of this topic.

***By 2024, will the next Nuclear Posture Review explicitly affirm that decisions to authorize nuclear weapons employment must only be made by humans?***

This question resolves positively if the next Nuclear Posture Review (released between the time of this question opening and 31-12-2023) includes clear affirmation that decisions to authorize nuclear weapons employment must only be made by humans.

This question resolves ambiguously if a new Nuclear Posture Review is not publicly available by 2024 (but that seems very unlikely).

By 2024, will the next Nuclear Posture Review explicitly affirm that decisions to authorize nuclear weapons employment must only be made by humans?

The contract that resolves to Yes shall be that which identifies the Senate majority leader at the End Date listed below. 
PredictIt’s decisions and determinations under this rule shall be at PredictIt’s sole discretion and shall be final.
End Date: 02/01/2023 11:59 PM (ET)


Chuck Schumer

Mitch McConnell

Dick Durbin

John Cornyn

Patty Murray

John Thune

John Barrasso

Joni Ernst

Who will be Senate majority leader on Feb. 1, 2023?

Over two years after a deadly clash in the Himalayas left dozens dead, tensions between China and India remain ([Diplomat](https://thediplomat.com/2022/10/the-sino-indian-border-the-front-line-of-the-quad/), [The Hindu](https://www.thehindu.com/news/international/xi-jinping-promotes-three-india-border-command-generals-to-top-pla-posts/article66048985.ece), [Outlook India](https://www.outlookindia.com/national/defense-minister-claims-india-will-not-cede-an-inch-of-land-to-anyone-news-204736), [Devdiscourse](https://www.devdiscourse.com/article/international/2227043-normalization-of-india-china-ties-in-worlds-interest-jaishankar-after-china-envoys-farewell-call)). A lethal confrontation is one that results in at least one fatality (total, not each) for the national military forces, militia, and/or law enforcement of either side.
Confused? Check our [FAQ](https://www.gjopen.com/faq#question) or [ask us for help](mailto:clarifications@goodjudgment.com?subject=Question%20Clarification). To learn more about Good Judgment and Superforecasting, [click here](https://goodjudgment.com/).
To learn more about how you can become a Superforecaster, [see here](https://goodjudgment.com/how-to-become-a-superforecaster/). For other posts from our Insights blog, [click here](https://goodjudgment.com/insights/).


Will there be a lethal confrontation between the national military forces, militia, and/or law enforcement personnel of India and the People's Republic of China before 1 January 2024?

As China continues to deal with COVID outbreaks and a distressed property market, its economic growth has slowed ([CNBC](https://www.cnbc.com/2022/08/24/china-should-be-more-aggressive-in-response-to-slow-growth-investor.html), [Al Jazeera](https://www.aljazeera.com/economy/2022/8/25/china-touts-fiscal-monetary-policies-revive-flagging-economy), [Guardian](https://www.theguardian.com/world/2022/aug/23/chinas-economy-is-losing-momentum-what-is-happening-and-why-does-it-matter-for-australia)). The question will be suspended on 31 March 2023 and the outcome determined using quarterly data from China&#39;s National Bureau of Statistics as first reported by Trading Economics, expected in April 2023 ([Trading Economics](https://tradingeconomics.com/china/gdp-growth-annual)).
Confused? Check our [FAQ](https://www.gjopen.com/faq#question) or [ask us for help](mailto:clarifications@goodjudgment.com?subject=Question%20Clarification). To learn more about Good Judgment and Superforecasting, [click here](https://goodjudgment.com/).
To learn more about how you can become a Superforecaster, [see here](https://goodjudgment.com/how-to-become-a-superforecaster/). For other posts from our Insights blog, [click here](https://goodjudgment.com/insights/).


Less than 0.0%

Between 0.0% and 2.0%, inclusive

More than 2.0% but less than 4.0%

Between 4.0% and 6.0%, inclusive

More than 6.0% but less than 8.0%

8.0% or more

What will be China's annual GDP growth rate for the first quarter of 2023?

This is a market on whether Ukraine will sever Russia's land bridge to Crimea at any point before September 31, 2023. The primary resolution source will be the Institute for the Study of War (ISW): [https://storymaps.arcgis.com/stories/36a7f6a6f5a9448496de641cf64bd375](https://storymaps.arcgis.com/stories/36a7f6a6f5a9448496de641cf64bd375). This market will resolve as yes if the ISW shows that Ukraine has broken Russia's land bridge, i.e., that Russia has no contiguous control over land that would allow it to drive to Crimea not counting the Kherch (Crimean) Bridge. This would require Ukraine taking back territory that includes at least some coastline between Henichesk and the Russian border near Taganrog, which would imply this territory not being colored in red on the map. For the purposes of this market, if the small strip of land to the south of "Molochnoye Ozera", south of Melitopol, is still red, it would classify as Russian continuing to have a land bridge from Russia, even if Ukraine bombs the bridge which actually connects that territory. 
There are "maker subsidies" and "taker fees" on this market. The taker fees apply when you match an existing order on the order book, whereas the maker subsidy happens when you place an unmatched order that can be matched later. The maker subsidies are .025 times the price, times the potential profit (e.g., Maker Subsidy per share = .025*Price/100*(1-Price/100)). The taker fees are .09 times the price, times the potential profit (e.g., Taker Fee per share = .09*Price/100*(1-Price/100)). Thus, the maker subsidy to buy 100 shares at 20 cents would be: 100*.025*(20/100)*(80/100) = $0.40, and the taker fee would be $1.44. The full fee schedule [is here](http://insightprediction.com/page/FAQ#Fee-Schedule). End Date: 10/1/2023


Will Ukraine Sever the Land Bridge to Crimea by September 30th, 2023?

The Exchange uses two NWS products for its Underlying: (1) the Daily Climate Reports for New Orleans, LA and (2) any location within the city limits of New Orleans, LA included in an NWS Post-Storm Hurricane Report.

The market will expire on the first 10:00 AM ET following the release of official data at the Underlying confirming the event has occurred. Otherwise, the market will expire on the sooner of the the first 10:00 AM ET following the release of data for || Date ||, or one week after || Date ||.. The resolution source is: undefined (undefined)

Will a hurricane category 2 hurricane or stronger hit New Orleans this year?

*You can now see an excellent visualization of global catastrophic risks estimates produced in the Ragnarök series [here](https://possibleworldstree.com/).*


Currently, artificial intelligence can outperform humans in a number of narrow domains, such as playing chess and searching data. As artificial intelligence researchers continue to make progress, though, these domains are highly likely to grow in number and breadth over time. Many experts now believe there is a significant chance that a machine superintelligence – a system that can outperform humans at all relevant intelligence tasks – will be developed within the next century, and possibly much sooner.

In a [2017 survey of artificial intelligence experts](https://arxiv.org/pdf/1705.08807.pdf), experts were asked about the effects of human level machine intelligence. They assigned a 10% for a bad outcome and 5% for an outcome described as “Extremely Bad (e.g., human extinction).” Although a selection bias, large variance in responses (reflecting vast uncertainty), and the unreliability of subjective opinions mean that these estimates warrant skepticism, they nevertheless suggest that the possibility of superintelligence ought to be taken seriously.

In a [2008 survey](https://www.fhi.ox.ac.uk/reports/2008-1.pdf) at the Global Catastrophic Risk Conference in Oxford, participants were asked to make their best guess at the chance that there will be disasters of different types before 2100. The median estimate of the chance of 1 billion deaths by 2100 by a superintelligent AI was 5%. Interestingly the median estimate of the chance of human extinction by a superintelligent AI was also 5%, suggesting that if an AI-failure-mode-induced-catastrophe does occur, it's likely be a terminal one for human civilisation.

When considering how AI might become a risk, experts think two scenarios most likely (according to the [Future of Life Institute](https://futureoflife.org/background/benefits-risks-of-artificial-intelligence/)): 

> 1. The AI is programmed to do something devastating: Autonomous weapons are artificial intelligence systems that are programmed to kill. In the hands of the wrong person, these weapons could easily cause mass casualties. Moreover, an AI arms race could inadvertently lead to an AI war that also results in mass casualties. To avoid being thwarted by the enemy, these weapons would be designed to be extremely difficult to simply “turn off,” so humans could plausibly lose control of such a situation. This risk is one that’s present even with narrow AI, but grows as levels of AI intelligence and autonomy increase. 
> 2. The AI is programmed to do something beneficial, but it develops a destructive method for achieving its goal: This can happen whenever we fail to fully align the AI’s goals with ours, which is strikingly difficult. If you ask an obedient intelligent car to take you to the airport as fast as possible, it might get you there chased by helicopters and covered in vomit, doing not what you wanted but literally what you asked for. If a superintelligent system is tasked with a ambitious geoengineering project, it might wreak havoc with our ecosystem as a side effect, and view human attempts to stop it as a threat to be met. As these examples illustrate, the concern about advanced AI isn’t malevolence but competence. A super-intelligent AI will be extremely good at accomplishing its goals, and if those goals aren’t aligned with ours, we have a problem. You’re probably not an evil ant-hater who steps on ants out of malice, but if you’re in charge of a hydroelectric green energy project and there’s an anthill in the region to be flooded, too bad for the ants.

In the first part of the Ragnarök Question Series, we asked the question [If a global catastrophe occurs, will it be due to an artificial intelligence failure-mode?](https://www.metaculus.com/questions/1495/ragnar%25C3%25B6k-question-series-if-a-global-catastrophe-occurs-will-it-be-due-to-an-artificial-intelligence-failure-mode/) Now it is asked,

**Given that an artificial intelligence failure-mode catastrophe occurs that results in the reduction of global population of at least 10% by 2100, will the global population decline by more than 95% relative to the pre-catastrophe population?**

The question resolves *positive* if such a catastrophe does occur, **and** the global population is less than 95% of the pre-catastrophe population at any point within 25 years of the catastrophe. It resolves *ambiguous* if an artificial intelligence global catastrophe that claims at least 10% (in any period of 5 years or less) does not occur. The question resolves *negative* if a an artificial intelligence failure-mode induced global catastrophe occurs that claims at least 10% (in any period of 5 years or less) but the post-catastrophe population remains above 5%.

-------


This question is part of the Ragnarök Question Series. Check out the other questions in the series:

1. [If a global biological catastrophe occurs, will it reduce the human population by 95% or more?](https://www.metaculus.com/questions/2514/ragnar%25C3%25B6k-question-series-if-a-global-biological-catastrophe-occurs-will-it-reduce-the-human-population-by-95-or-more/)

2. [If an artificial intelligence catastrophe occurs, will it reduce the human population by 95% or more?](https://www.metaculus.com/questions/2513/ragnar%25C3%25B6k-question-series-if-an-artificial-intelligence-catastrophe-occurs-will-it-reduce-the-human-population-by-95-or-more/)

3. [If a nuclear catastrophe occurs, will it reduce the human population by 95% or more?](https://www.metaculus.com/questions/1585/ragnar%25C3%25B6k-question-series-if-a-nuclear-catastrophe-occurs-will-it-reduce-the-human-population-by-95-or-more/)

4. [If a global climate disaster occurs by 2100, will the human population decline by 95% or more?](https://www.metaculus.com/questions/1604/ragnar%25C3%25B6k-question-series-if-a-global-climate-disaster-occurs-by-2100-will-the-earths-human-population-decline-by-95-or-more/)

5. [If a global nanotechnology catastrophe occurs by 2100, will the human population decline by 95% or more?](https://www.metaculus.com/questions/7795/)

Also, please check out our questions on whether a global catastrophe will occur by 2100, and if so, which?:

6. [By 2100 will the human population decrease by at least 10% during any period of 5 years?](https://www.metaculus.com/questions/1493/ragnar%25C3%25B6k-question-series-by-2100-will-the-human-population-decrease-by-at-least-10-during-any-period-of-5-years/)

7. [Will such a catastrophe be due to either human-made climate change or geoengineering?](https://www.metaculus.com/questions/1500/ragnar%25C3%25B6k-question-series-if-a-global-catastrophe-occurs-will-it-be-due-to-either-human-made-climate-change-or-geoengineering/)

8. [Will such a catastrophe be due to a nanotechnology failure-mode?](https://www.metaculus.com/questions/1501/ragnar%25C3%25B6k-question-series-if-a-global-catastrophe-occurs-will-it-be-due-to-nanotechnology-failure-mode/)

9. [Will such a catastrophe be due to nuclear war?](https://www.metaculus.com/questions/1494/ragnar%25C3%25B6k-question-series-if-a-global-catastrophe-occurs-will-it-be-due-to-nuclear-war/)

10. [Will such a catastrophe be due to an artificial intelligence failure-mode?](https://www.metaculus.com/questions/1495/ragnar%25C3%25B6k-question-series-if-a-global-catastrophe-occurs-will-it-be-due-to-an-artificial-intelligence-failure-mode/)

11. [Will such a catastrophe be due to biotechnology or bioengineered organisms?](https://www.metaculus.com/questions/1502/ragnar%25C3%25B6k-question-series-if-a-global-catastrophe-occurs-will-it-be-due-to-biotechnology-or-bioengineered-organisms/)

All results [are analysed here](https://www.metaculus.com/questions/2568/ragnar%25C3%25B6k-question-series-results-so-far/), and will be updated periodically.

Ragnarök Question Series: if an artificial intelligence catastrophe occurs, will it reduce the human population by 95% or more?

*Related Questions on Metaculus:*

* [Will there be a complete 4 year interval in which world output doubles, before the first 1 year interval in which world output doubles?](https://www.metaculus.com/questions/736/gwp-doubles-in-4-years-vs-1-year-by-2050/)
* [Will there be a complete 4 year interval in which world output doubles, before the first 1 year interval in which world output doubles?](https://www.metaculus.com/questions/736/gwp-doubles-in-4-years-vs-1-year-by-2050/)

----

As of 2018, it's taken [about 16 years for the world economic output to double](https://data.worldbank.org/indicator/NY.GDP.MKTP.KD). So it might seem absurd to talk about it doubling in one or even four years. But there is a potential major change on the horizon: very advanced Artificial Intelligence.

An important consideration in how to approach the [AI alignment problem](https://mapandterritory.org/formally-stating-the-ai-alignment-problem-fe7a6e3e5991) is the speed of the takeoff from massively subhuman AI to massively superhuman AI. The effectiveness of capacity limitation, as well as the existence of fire alarms for AI safety, are heavily dependent on this, for example.

Paul Christiano [suggests](https://sideways-view.com/2018/02/24/takeoff-speeds/) operationalising the takeoff speed in terms of economic growth. A slow takeoff is one where the economy doubles in four years before the first time it doubles in one year, and a fast takeoff is one where it does not. (See the same article for Christiano's list of arguments regarding fast vs. slow takeoff.)

***Will there be a 4 year interval in which world output doubles before 2050?***

Resolution is by credible assessment of world GDP in constant US dollars (or other appropriately widely-accepted units).

This question will resolve positively if world output doubles in a period of 4 years or less before 2050. It resolves negatively otherwise, i.e. if the following related question resolves ambiguously:

* [Will there be a complete 4 year interval in which world output doubles, before the first 1 year interval in which world output doubles?](https://www.metaculus.com/questions/736/will-there-be-a-complete-4-year-interval-in-which-world-output-doubles-before-the-first-1-year-interval-in-which-world-output-doubles/)

Will there be a 4 year interval in which world output doubles before 2050?

The question will be suspended on 31 March 2023 and the outcome determined using "Growth Rate %" data as first reported by the Dubai Statistics Center ([Dubai Statistics Center - National Accounts](https://www.dsc.gov.ae/en-us/Themes/Pages/National-Accounts.aspx?Theme=24), see "Constant Prices" reports). The figure in the PDF file will be used for resolution. In the first quarter of 2022, the real GDP growth rate in the first quarter of 2022 as compared to the first quarter of 2021 was 5.88% ([Gross Domestic Product at Constant Prices First Quarter - Emirate of Dubai 2022](https://www.dsc.gov.ae/Report/Gross%20Domestic%20Product%20at%20Constant%20Price%20Q1%202022.pdf)).
Confused? Check our [FAQ](https://www.gjopen.com/faq#question) or [ask us for help](mailto:clarifications@goodjudgment.com?subject=Question%20Clarification). To learn more about Good Judgment and Superforecasting, [click here](https://goodjudgment.com/).
To learn more about how you can become a Superforecaster, [see here](https://goodjudgment.com/how-to-become-a-superforecaster/). For other posts from our Insights blog, [click here](https://goodjudgment.com/insights/).


Lower by more than 3.00%

Lower by between 0.00% and 3.00%, inclusive

Higher by more than 0.00% but less than 3.00%

Higher by between 3.00% and 6.00%, inclusive

Higher by more than 6.00%

What will be the annual real GDP percentage growth rate for the Emirate of Dubai in the first quarter of 2023 as compared to the first quarter of 2022?

According to [physicsworld](https://physicsworld.com/a/fast-quantum-random-number-generator-could-advance-cryptography-on-the-cheap/), 
> When numbers are used to securely encode information, the randomness of those numbers is crucial: a string of truly random numbers is one that a hacker can never guess. In classical physics, however, all processes – even chaotic ones – are deterministic, making true randomness impossible. [..] In the quantum world, in contrast, “there are these fundamentally non-deterministic processes,” says Nathan Walk, a physicist at Freie Universitat Berlin, Germany

[Proof of Stake (PoS)](https://eth.wiki/en/concepts/proof-of-stake-faqs) is a type of consensus algorithm used by cryptocurrencies. Unlike Proof of Work (used by Bitcoin), PoS does not incentivize extreme amounts of energy consumption. PoS uses a pseudo-random process to select the validator to create the next block.

Scott Aaronson, a theoretical computer scientist with a focus on quantum computing, wrote in his [blog](https://www.scottaaronson.com/blog/?p=4317) that
>because of my certified randomness protocol, which shows how a sampling-based quantum supremacy experiment could almost immediately be repurposed to generate bits that can be proven to be random to a skeptical third party (under computational assumptions). This, in turn, has possible applications to proof-of-stake cryptocurrencies and other cryptographic protocols.

Random number generators have been shown to be vulnerable in the past and the future of PoS cryptocurrencies may rely on their security. During the [Hot Lotto fraud scandal](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hot_Lotto_fraud_scandal),
>It came to light in 2017, after Eddie Raymond Tipton, the former information security director of the Multi-State Lottery Association (MUSL), confessed to rigging a random number generator that he and two others used in multiple cases of fraud against state lotteries. Tipton was first convicted in October 2015 of rigging a $14.3 million drawing of MUSL's lottery game Hot Lotto.

Additionally, as part of the [Bullrun program](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bullrun_(decryption_program)#Methods), the NSA was reported to have a backdoor in the Dual_EC_DRBG random number generator.

***Will a cryptocurrency be created using a quantum random number generator by 2036?***

This question will resolve positively if a credible media, company, or scientific source reports that a cryptocurrency has been created using a quantum random number generator and uses quantum random number generation as part of its normal functioning on an ongoing basis.

Will a cryptocurrency be created using a quantum random number generator by 2036?

According to most recent estimations by Arms Control Association, China currently has a nuclear arsenal of about 350 warheads [though the US Department of Defense estimated them in 2020 to be somewhere in the "low-200s"]( https://media.defense.gov/2021/Nov/03/2002885874/-1/-1/0/2021-CMPR-FINAL.PDF) (page 92). Compared to the world's total count of over 13,000, this is a vanishingly small number, as US and Russia [continue to hold more than 90% of the total nuclear warheads](https://www.armscontrol.org/factsheets/Nuclearweaponswhohaswhat). 

The 2021 'Military and Security Developments Involving the People's Republic of China' report by the US Department of Defense estimates that China might have up to 700 deliverable nuclear warheads by 2027, and " likely intends to have at least 1,000 warheads by 2030" (page 90).  

This Metaculus question forecasts a 68% chance [China will have over 420 nuclear warheads by 2024](https://www.metaculus.com/questions/8139/china-have-420-warheads-by-2024/).

If these projections come true, this has the potential of shifting the balance of power. [As the Financial Times reports,](https://www.ft.com/content/d7c50283-18c8-4f2e-8731-970d9a547688?shareType=nongift) "Military leaders in Washington face two critical questions. After decades of gradual increases in its nuclear forces, is China pivoting to a less defensive approach that has the potential to significantly alter the balance of power in East Asia? And could this enable China to win a conflict with the US over Taiwan by neutralising the threat from American nuclear weapons?"

Understanding China's longer-term nuclear strategy is crucial for geopolitical strategy of the US/EU in Asia.

***Will China reach 1,000 nuclear warheads by 2030?***

This resolves positively if China is reported to have achieved 1,000 nuclear warheads by 2030 according to the FAS (https://fas.org/issues/nuclear-weapons/status-world-nuclear-forces/).

This resolves negatively if no such reports happen by 2030. 

This resolves ambiguously if the political entity of 'China' dissolves or otherwise changes significantly.

Will China reach 1,000 nuclear warheads by 2030?

[Libor](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Libor), the floating rate used in all sorts of financial contracts from student loans to derivates, served its purpose for quite a while, but it brought down by abuse and manipulation by the British banks that set it. This became evident a decade ago when several people [went to jail for manipulating Libor](https://www.cfr.org/backgrounder/understanding-libor-scandal), sometimes [so blatantly that it was hilarious](https://www.businessinsider.com/read-the-bloomberg-chats-that-got-a-former-rbs-libor-trader-paul-white-banned-for-life-2016-4?op=1). In recent years, financial authorities across the globe have been looking at ways to move away from Libor, and multiple solutions have been proposed.

In the US and other countries of the Americas, the overnight guaranteed funding rate (SOFR), is slowly replacing Libor. It’s not perfect, but it’s a good alternative. However, it’s significantly lower than Libor, as it is a rate for essentially risk-free loans secured by Treasury bonds, while Libor incorporates the credit risk of banks. Libor is now around three basis points (0.03%) above but historically it has been rather around 10 basis points (0.1%).

Contracts in SOFR are already incorporating extra costs to account for this difference, but there’s uncertainty in the market. ICE Benchmark Administration, the Libor rate provider, intended to phase out many Libor rates at the start of 2022, but [announced a delay in September](https://www.theice.com/iba/libor), for a "synthetic" extension on some GBP and JPY rates until January 1, 2023, while no US dollar Libor rate will be provided from July 1, 2023.

***Will there be any further delay to the Libor cessation in 2023?***

This question will resolve as **Yes** if, by June 30, 2023, [ICE Benchmark Association](https://www.theice.com/iba/libor) announces any further delay in the phasing out of Libor rates. This question will resolve as **Yes** even if the delay involves a so-called “synthetic” methodology so that the rate is no longer representative of the underlying market.

Will there be any further delay to the Libor cessation in 2023?

In 2019, at a speech at the Foresight Institute, biomedical gerontologist Aubrey de Grey [stated](https://youtu.be/QmoYYewuw-c?t=660):

> I think we are still 15-20 years away [from effective anti-aging therapies] but the anticipation of the therapy by the general public is coming soon, and it is that anticipation that is going to be the point when the shit really hits the fan. If you think about a situation in which less than five years from now [...] in a period of about a week, half of the developed world is going to shift from an expectation that they will live only slightly longer than their parents did, into an expectation that they're going to live far longer than anyone has ever lived.

If half of the people in the developed world came to believe within a period of a week that effective anti-aging therapies were imminent, this would likely be a culturally significant event, perhaps among the most significant in the 2020's.

This question resolves positively if any of the terms "aging", "ageing", "anti-aging", "anti-ageing", "longevity", "lifespan", "rejuvenation", or "life extension" are mentioned as a direct reference to longevity research\* in any of the following media sources produced between January 1st 2020 and January 1st 2030 UTC:

 1. The English Wikipedia's "In the news" [section](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:In_the_news).

 or

 2. History.com's summary of events for a year in the 2020's.

 or

 3. The transcript for a primary or general presidential election debate in America.

It also resolves positively if:

 4. A longevity researcher receives Time's Person of the Year for their work on defeating aging.

Otherwise, this question resolves negatively on the 1st of January 2030.

In case of positive resolution, this question retroactively closes 1 day before the triggering event.

*ETA: 2022-04-08: qualifying primary or general presidential election debates are limited to mainstream debates (i.e., Republican and Democratic primaries + general election debates).*



\* "longevity research" here means the research comes from a group whose explicit purpose (as defined by their charter, or their about page on their website, or by some official statement made by the organisation which pertains to their research ends) is to slow, halt, or reverse the natural aging process. Examples of research groups which meet this criteria are the SENS Research Foundation and The Sinclair Lab at Harvard.

Will there be a culturally significant development in aging research by 2030?

This is a market on if Joe Biden will be President of the United States on February 1, 2023, 12 PM ET. 

This market will resolve to “Yes“ if, at the time of this market's resolution, Joe Biden is the President of the United States as officially substantiated by US government sources. Otherwise, this market will resolve to "No."

The primary resolution source for this market is https://www.whitehouse.gov/; however, other official government sources may be used.

Will Joe Biden be President of the USA on February 1, 2023?

From [an article](https://techxplore.com/news/2020-07-photon-based-enable-complex-machine.html) reporting on new developments in photonic tensor cores,

> A paper in the journal Applied Physics Reviews, by AIP Publishing, proposes a new approach to perform computations required by a neural network, using light instead of electricity. In this approach, a photonic tensor core performs multiplications of matrices in parallel, improving speed and efficiency of current deep learning paradigms.

> In machine learning, neural networks are trained to learn to perform unsupervised decision and classification on unseen data. Once a neural network is trained on data, it can produce an inference to recognize and classify objects and patterns and find a signature within the data.

> The photonic TPU stores and processes data in parallel, featuring an electro-optical interconnect, which allows the optical memory to be efficiently read and written and the photonic TPU to interface with other architectures.



The abstract from the [paper](https://aip.scitation.org/doi/10.1063/5.0001942) reads, 

> While several photonic neural network designs have been explored, a photonic tensor core to perform tensor operations is yet to be implemented. In this manuscript, we introduce an integrated photonics-based tensor core unit by strategically utilizing (i) photonic parallelism via wavelength division multiplexing, (ii) high 2 peta-operations-per-second throughputs enabled by tens of picosecond-short delays from optoelectronics and compact photonic integrated circuitry, and (iii) near-zero static power-consuming novel photonic multi-state memories based on phase-change materials featuring vanishing losses in the amorphous state. Combining these physical synergies of material, function, and system, we show, supported by numerical simulations, that the performance of this 4-bit photonic tensor core unit can be 1 order of magnitude higher for electrical data. The full potential of this photonic tensor processor is delivered for optical data being processed, where we find a 2–3 orders higher performance (operations per joule), as compared to an electrical tensor core unit, while featuring similar chip areas.

Photonic tensor cores are said to be "ubiquitous" in machine learning by 2030 if all three of the top machine learning cloud computing services offer photonic tensor cores for training models. The top machine learning cloud computing services are taken to the top three services that are yielded by the DuckDuckGo search, "machine learning cloud computing service" (If DuckDuckGo is no longer available, the following take their place in order of priority: Google, Bing).

This question resolves positively if photonic tensor cores are ubiquitous in machine learning by 2030, and negatively otherwise.

Will photonic tensor cores be ubiquitous in machine learning by 2030?

The CLB is an NGO that, among other things, tracks worker incidents in the People&#39;s Republic of China ([CLB](https://clb.org.hk/)). The question will be suspended on 31 May 2023 and the outcome determined using data as reported by the CLB in its Strike Map ([CLB - Strike Map](https://maps.clb.org.hk/)). To download the data, select the relevant ranges for "Date," and "All" for location and industry. Data will be accessed for resolution at approximately 5:00PM ET on 14 June 2023. CLB reported 530 worker actions between 1 December 2021 and 31 May 2022.
Confused? Check our [FAQ](https://www.gjopen.com/faq#question) or [ask us for help](mailto:clarifications@goodjudgment.com?subject=Question%20Clarification). To learn more about Good Judgment and Superforecasting, [click here](https://goodjudgment.com/).
To learn more about how you can become a Superforecaster, [see here](https://goodjudgment.com/how-to-become-a-superforecaster/). For other posts from our Insights blog, [click here](https://goodjudgment.com/insights/).


Fewer than 300

Between 300 and 500, inclusive

More than 500 but fewer than 700

Between 700 and 900, inclusive

More than 900 but fewer than 1,100

1,100 or more

How many worker actions will the China Labour Bulletin (CLB) report between 1 December 2022 and 31 May 2023?

The EU is facing a bevy of challenges to its economic health in the near term ([NASDAQ](https://www.nasdaq.com/articles/europes-gas-crisis-set-to-deepen-after-winter-drains-reserves), [CNBC](https://www.cnbc.com/2022/09/06/euro-dollar-exchange-rate-yields-steep-discount-for-americans.html), [US News &amp; World Report](https://money.usnews.com/investing/news/articles/2022-10-04/top-eu-officials-call-for-joint-borrowing-to-deal-with-energy-crisis)). The question will be suspended on 31 March 2023 and the outcome determined using data from Eurostat for real GDP as reported by the Federal Reserve Economic Data database (FRED) upon the release of the final estimate for the first quarter of 2023, called the "GDP main aggregates and employment estimates for the first quarter of 2023," expected in early June 2023 ([FRED](https://fred.stlouisfed.org/series/CLVMEURSCAB1GQEU272020)). The value for the first quarter of 2023 (Q1 2023) will be divided by the value for the fourth quarter of 2022 (Q4 2022) to determine the rate of real GDP growth, which can be done on the FRED page by 1) clicking "EDIT GRAPH," and 2) changing "Units:" to "Percent Change."
Confused? Check our [FAQ](https://www.gjopen.com/faq#question) or [ask us for help](mailto:clarifications@goodjudgment.com?subject=Question%20Clarification). To learn more about Good Judgment and Superforecasting, [click here](https://goodjudgment.com/).
To learn more about how you can become a Superforecaster, [see here](https://goodjudgment.com/how-to-become-a-superforecaster/). For other posts from our Insights blog, [click here](https://goodjudgment.com/insights/).


Lower by 2.0% or more

Lower by between 1.0% and 2.0%, inclusive

Lower by more than 0.0% but less than 1.0%

Higher by between 0.0% and 1.0%, inclusive

Higher by more than 1.0% but less than 2.0%

Higher by 2.0% or more

What will be the percentage change in real GDP for the European Union in the first quarter of 2023 as compared to the fourth quarter of 2022?

Embryo selection is a potential emerging technology and is the subject of [several previous Metaculus questions](https://www.metaculus.com/questions/?order_by=-activity&search=Embryo%20selection) and a [notebook](https://www.metaculus.com/notebooks/9247/polygenic-selection-of-embryos/).

The United States is a [world leader in science and technology](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Science_and_technology_in_the_United_States) and is [leading the world in Nobel Prizes](https://www.forbes.com/sites/jonbruner/2011/10/05/nobel-prizes-and-american-leadership-in-science-infographic/?sh=42afd89d2b85).  American companies Pfizer and Moderna developed two of the most effective COVID vaccines, and the United States had an early vaccination drive, vaccinating 10% of its population by early February 2021, earlier than the vast majority of other countries.  The United States has [no regulations on preimplantation genetic diagnosis (PGD)](https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5612618/), and it is home to embryo selection startups  like [Genomic Prediction](https://www.lifeview.com/) and [Orchid](https://www.orchidhealth.com/embryo). 
 [Public polling](https://www.pewresearch.org/science/2020/12/10/biotechnology-research-viewed-with-caution-globally-but-most-support-gene-editing-for-babies-to-treat-disease/) shows that the US public is not particularly supportive of "changing a baby's characteristics" to improve intelligence but [younger Americans are more supportive of the technology](https://www.pewresearch.org/science/2015/07/01/chapter-5-public-views-about-biomedical-issues/).  There has been some political opposition to embryo selection and other scientfiic advances from the [right](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Political_positions_of_the_Republican_Party#Abortion_and_embryonic_stem_cell_research), as many right-wing Americans are Christians who believe that [life beings at conception](https://www.princeton.edu/~prolife/articles/embryoquotes2.html) as well as from the [left](https://docs.google.com/document/d/1jb7w02E5GAdrJ_QnAokp7IerP_VBDridmQ-rI9M2TAE/edit), who have referred to embryo selection as "eugenics".  The [first polygenically screened baby](https://astralcodexten.substack.com/p/welcome-polygenically-screened-babies) was [born in the United States](https://www.ivfbabble.com/on-the-40th-anniversary-of-the-first-ivf-in-the-usa-the-first-baby-elizabeth-jordan-carr-looks-at-how-science-today-has-produced-a-new-world-first-baby-aurea/) in 2021.  Abortion [remains legal](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abortion_in_the_United_States) in the United States, and [recent challenges](https://www.texastribune.org/2022/01/20/supreme-court-texas-abortion-law-challenge/) to the legal status of abortion have not called for the criminalization of preimplantation diagnosis, or even for the criminalization of abortion in the first few weeks past pregnancy.

[American](https://www.edge.org/response-detail/23838) [media](https://www.vice.com/en/article/5gw8vn/chinas-taking-over-the-world-with-a-massive-genetic-engineering-program) has suggested that China, which is a [rival](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/China%E2%80%93United_States_relations) of the United States and has a quickly growing [biotechnology industry](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Biotechnology_industry_in_China), will embrace embryo selection for intelligence.  American professors have expressed [concern](https://quillette.com/2021/08/19/as-us-schools-prioritize-diversity-over-merit-china-is-becoming-the-worlds-stem-leader/) that the United States is losing its edge over China in scientific progress.


***Will the USA be the first country to embryo select >10% of its newborns for intelligence?***

This question resolves positively if the United States is the first country with over a million people to have more than 10% of its newborns developed from embryos selected for polygenic scores for intelligence, according to credible reports. If no country has >10% of its newborns selected for intelligence by 2300-01-01 it resolves as ambiguous.

Moreover, for the question to resolve positively, the particular procedure used for embryo selection must, in expectation, result in an increase of at least 1/5 standard deviations in IQ (i.e. 3 IQ points), according to credible evidence.

Will the USA be the first country to embryo select >10% of its newborns for intelligence?

Brazil contains 58.7% of the Amazon rainforest's extent; in 2020, an estimated [3.1 million square km](https://rainforests.mongabay.com/amazon/) were located in Brazil.  Brazil's national space agency INPE provides the [PRODES survey](http://www.obt.inpe.br/OBT/assuntos/programas/amazonia/prodes) on the amount of annual deforestation in [Amazônia Legal](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Amaz%C3%B4nia_Legal), the nine Brazillian states which contain the Brazillian Amazon Forest.  Deforestation in the Amazon fell from 27,700 km$^{2}$ in 2004 to 4,500 km$^{2}$, and has since risen under the [Jair Bolsonaro Administration](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jair_Bolsonaro).

Brazil also contains the [Atlantic Forest](https://rainforests.mongabay.com/mata-atlantica/), 92% of which was [estimated to be within Brazil](awsassets.panda.org/downloads/documento_fvs_baja.pdf) in 2017.  While an estimated 17% of the Amazon has been deforested since European contact, [92%](https://rainforests.mongabay.com/mata-atlantica/) of the Atlantic Forest has been deforested, from 1,300,000 km$^{2}$ to 100,000 km$^{2}$ in 2020.

In 2008, delegates from Brazil joined 66 other countries in pledging support for the World Wide Fund for Nature's goal to reach net zero deforestation by 2020.  In April 2021, [Bolsonaro pledged](https://www.reuters.com/business/environment/brazil-must-cut-deforestation-15-20-year-reach-2030-goal-says-vice-president-2021-04-16/) to US President Joe Biden to cut illegal deforestation and reach net zero deforestation by 2030.

***Will Brazil reach net zero deforestation before 2031?***

This question will resolve as "Yes" If primary forest area in Brazil has a net increase in any year from 2020 to 2031.  Estimates should include data in the Amazon Rainforest and the Atlantic Forest in total for the same year.  Estimates may come from Brazil's [National Institute for Space Research](http://www.obt.inpe.br/OBT/assuntos/programas/amazonia/prodes) (INPE), or another credible source if INPE data is not available.  This question will resolve according to data available by March 1, 2033.

Will Brazil reach net zero deforestation before 2031?

The Turing test (originally called the imitation game by Alan Turing's [1950 paper](https://phil415.pbworks.com/f/TuringComputing.pdf)) is a test of a machine's ability to exhibit intelligent behaviour equivalent to, or indistinguishable from, that of a human. Turing proposed that a human evaluator would judge natural language conversations between a human and a machine designed to generate human-like responses. The evaluator would be aware that one of the two partners in conversation is a machine, and all participants would be separated from one another. If the evaluator cannot reliably tell the machine from the human, the machine is said to have passed the test.

By a rough analogy, then, we might say that a product passes a 'Turing Test' for plant-based meat if an evaluator cannot reliably tell the difference between plant-based meat and actual meat products.

***Will a 'Turing Test' for plant-based meat be passed if such a test is conducted by April 2023?***

This question will resolve as **Yes** if, before April 1, 2023, a double-blinded randomised controlled trial reveals that human evaluators are not able to distinguish actual and plant-based meat products. The test must involve at least 50 subjects in both the control group (who receive actual meat products) and at least one of the treatment group (who receive plant-based meat products).

To qualify for positive resolution, the result must be statistically significant. In particular:

- If the null hypothesis is that there is a difference between the relevant products, positive resolution requires that the null hypothesis must be rejected at at least a 5% sign. level
- In case the null hypothesis is that there is no difference in the subject's guesses about the contents of the product, positive resolution requires that the null hypothesis cannot be rejected at a 10% significance level.

This question will resolve as **Ambiguous** if no test that satisfies the above description is conducted by April 1, 2023

We define plant based meat as products made from plant and non-animal products that resemble meat in texture, flavor, and appearance. Plant and non-animal ingredients can include anything as long as they are not sourced from an animal of any kind. 

*ETA (2021-04-28): The product (beef, poultry, pork or fish) must contains at least 20% plant-based meat by weight, and the total weight must be no less than 50 grams*

Will a 'Turing Test' for plant-based meat be passed if such a test is conducted by April 2023?

A [tsunami](https://oceanservice.noaa.gov/facts/tsunami.html) is a wave or series of waves generated by the displacement of water from an energetic event such as an earthquake. Tsunamis can be enormously destructive and cause mass casualty events; the deadliest documented tsunami, in the Indian Ocean on 26 December, 2004, killed more than 200,000 people.

***Will there be a tsunami that kills at least 50,000 people before 2030?***

This question resolves will resolve as **Yes** there is a single tsunami which can be attributed to 50,000 fatalities.  The tsunami must occur between October 1, 2022 to January 1, 2030, but the fatalities need not occur strictly within this time period.

To resolve the question, Metaculus will consider all credible sources, including [USGS Earthquake Hazards Program](https://www.usgs.gov/programs/earthquake-hazards/lists-maps-and-statistics) and other official statistics and media reports.

Will there be a tsunami that kills at least 50,000 people before 2030?

Another question in this tournament asks [Will there be a 10% global agricultural shortfall by 2024?](https://www.metaculus.com/questions/8540/global-agricultural-shortfall-by-2024/). 

[Denkenberger & Pearce (2016)](https://link.springer.com/content/pdf/10.1007%2Fs13753-016-0097-2.pdf) write:


>"The uncertainty in the number of fatalities due to a 10% agricultural shortfall is very large. On the optimistic extreme, there could be aggressive government support or charity such that the vast majority of the global poor could generally afford sufficient food. If the crisis were only a year or two, loans could be feasible, either to poor individuals or poor countries. The necessary conservation (less waste, less food to animals, and so on) in the developed countries could be achieved by higher prices or rationing. However, even if mass starvation is averted, generally there would be more malnutrition and increasing susceptibility to disease. The poor would be less able to afford other lifesaving measures, and a pandemic would be more likely. Even if food aid is available, it may not be possible to get the food to the people who need it. Therefore, near zero mortality is unlikely. At the same time, even with no catastrophe, 6.5 million people die of hunger-related diseases per year (UNICEF 2006). On the other extreme, there could be food export restrictions or bans, as implemented by India, Vietnam, Egypt, and China in 2008 (Helfand 2013) when the situation was much less serious. This hoarding on a country level could also be coupled with hoarding on an individual level. This could dramatically reduce the food supply available to poor people.


>Armed conflict could be in some countries’ best interest, which could also aggravate famine (Keller 1992; Waldman 2001; Goodhand 2003). These wars could even evolve into nuclear conflict, which would further impact food supplies."

***If there's a 10% global agricultural shortfall by 2030, will this cause >400 million fatalities?***

This question conditions on there being a 10% global agricultural shortfall by 2030, using the same specification as in [a previous question](LINK) (except that here the year 2030 is used instead of 2024[1]). That is, the question resolves ambiguously if that condition isn't met. As noted in that previous question, this could be caused either by nuclear conflict or by something else.


The question resolves positively if: 


1. The above condition is met

2. At least three credible sources state or estimate that, within 5 years of the end of the year in which the first 10% shortfall by 2030 occurs, more than 400 million fatalities were caused by that shortfall. 


For example, if the shortfall occurs in 2027, this question is about whether that causes >400m fatalities by the end of 2032.


If a source gives a range as its estimate, the midpoint of that range will be used as its estimate. 


**See also:**

* [Will the first nuclear conflict involving >100 detonations cause >1m fatalities within 1 month of the final detonation?](https://www.metaculus.com/questions/8395/nuclear-conflict-involving-100-detonations/)

* [Will the first nuclear conflict involving >100 detonations cause >100m fatalities within 1 month of the final detonation?](https://www.metaculus.com/questions/8398/nuclear-conflict-involving-100-detonations/)

* [Will the first nuclear conflict involving >100 detonations cause >1b fatalities within 10 years of the final detonation?](https://www.metaculus.com/questions/8381/nuclear-conflict-involving-100-detonations/)

* [Will the first nuclear conflict involving >1000 detonations cause >4b fatalities within 10 years of the final detonation?](https://www.metaculus.com/questions/8382/nuclear-conflict-involving-1000-detonations/)

[fine-print]
For simplicity, no attempt will be made to second-guess credible sources on what fatalities should be considered to be "caused" by the 10% shortfall. For example, if the 10% shortfall is followed by armed conflict, no attempt will be made to second-guess what credible sources say about whether the fatalities caused by that armed conflict should be considered to be ultimately caused by the 10% shortfall.


[1] The reason for using 2030 rather than 2024 for this question is that the fatalities and discussion of them may occur on a several-year delay from the actual shortfall. It therefore seemed unwise to force this question to resolve by 2024, and hence best to make this part of the long-term rather than calibration tournament.
[/fine-print]

If there's a 10% global agricultural shortfall by 2030, will this cause >400 million fatalities?

[Elon Reeve Musk](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Elon_Musk), born June 28, 1971, is a serial entrepreneur and business executive. He is the founder, CEO, and Chief Engineer at SpaceX; early-stage investor, CEO, and Product Architect of Tesla, founder of The Boring Company, and co-founder of Neuralink and OpenAI. With an estimated net worth of around US$270 billion as of April 2022, Musk is the wealthiest person in the world according to both the [Bloomberg Billionaires Index](https://www.bloomberg.com/billionaires/) and the [Forbes real-time billionaires list.](https://www.forbes.com/real-time-billionaires/#3ed6f4c03d78)

In 2022, [Musk made an unsolicited $43 billion offer to take social media site Twitter private](https://www.cbsnews.com/news/elon-musk-twitter-purchase-offer-43-billion-private-company/), citing concerns around free speech on the platform, which he argues [is essential to a functioning democracy.](https://twitter.com/elonmusk/status/1507259709224632344)

Musk [characterises his political views as "somewhat libertarian,"](https://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2011/11/28/no-death-no-taxes) says he is ["not a conservative... registered independent & politically moderate,"](https://twitter.com/elonmusk/status/1018265614295523328) and [does not clearly align with either the Democratic or Republican party platforms.](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Elon_Musk#Politics)

***Will Elon Musk hold major political office in the United States before February 2033?***

This question will resolve as **yes** if, prior to February 1, 2033, Elon Musk legally holds any of the following public offices for any period of time:

- President of the United States
- Vice President of the United States
- Speaker of the House of Representatives
- United States Senator
- United States Representative
- Governor of any US state or territory

Will Elon Musk hold major political office in the United States before February 2033?

In the wake of the [Taliban takeover of Afghanistan](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2021_Taliban_offensive), the [Islamic Emirate of Afghanistan](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Islamic_Emirate_of_Afghanistan) has remained an [unrecognized state](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_states_with_limited_recognition).  Historically, Pakistan has had [close ties with the Taliban](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Taliban#Pakistan) and helped to [create it](https://www.npr.org/2021/08/27/1031809296/pakistan-helped-create-the-taliban-heres-what-it-means-for-the-country-now).

***Will Pakistan recognize the Islamic Emirate of Afghanistan before 2030?***

This question will resolve positively if before 01-01-2030, reliable media sources report that the Pakistani government has recognized the Islamic Emirate of Afghanistan.